What are the political and social implications of the new technologies and the methods of their consumption?

People who use new technology are often worried about the amount of time spent using it, there have been many issues with the amount of time that young people spend on social networking sites such as Facebook as it takes up a high amount of their time as well as causing trouble. For example, the USA put relationship trouble down to Facebook, "When Facebook gets involved, relationships can quickly fall apart" http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/08/facebook-us-divorces this causes personal and social implications because it can destroy peoples lives, such as cyber bullying, young people have committed suicide over what has been said to them by people over social networking and this causes a huge issue amongst society and creates problems causing parents to be either very strict on new technology or not at all. "The family unit is even more vulnerable today with soaring divorce rates, high rates of teenage suicide"

technological change brings social change. technology alienates people from the world around them, they are so engrossed in updating statuses listening to music and tweeting that they are completely oblivious to what is happening around them. this causes frustration for some people especially families as children isolate themselves and communication between the family becomes broken, which can cause arguments.


Sherry Turkle says how we are connected with the world but are isolated from the world. As a population we socialize virtually but not physically, the original use of the internet and computers was to be a tool to help with everyday life, but now we are provided with virtual world where people can go in and out of to interact with other people. she suggests that people have trouble distinguishing themselves between their human form and machines, that our minds are so engrossed in computers it becomes us. "Technology is seductive when what it offers meets our human vulnerabilities" this provides social implications because people are no longer willing to communicate and interact with each other on a more physical level, it seems we all want to live a "Second life, a virtual world where you get to build and avatar, a house, a family and a social life". Without people interacting with each other it creates an alienated world, a world that could soon become deserted where we will never have to move. Having home deliveries and ordering food on line has become more popular, causing even more people to stay at home and live separate lives from each other. 


http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=_Dhf5xEZZD0C&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ge_summary_r&cad=0#v=onepage&q&f=false


In terms of political issues, more serious issues in terms of world wide issues have arisen such as war, the internet had triggered the start of the Arab Spring. new technology means that the middle east have managed to create protests, demonstrations and riots over social networking sites all in an attempt to raise awareness of their states attempts to censor the internet. Facebook gives people the "the power to broadcast their grievances to the world and to galvanise an uprising" make everyone aware of their power, and Facebook helped them inform everyone of this. It caused an uprising as they began to realise that it gave them a voice so that they could be heard. with the introduction of Web 2.0 it allowed others to voice their own opinion rather than take what was already there, they have the power to shape and form what is now on the internet that has no regulation. 


http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/staying-in/what-s-on-tv/how-facebook-changed-the-world-the-arab-151690


political: arab spring, hacking into government documents and phones. forming riots and groups on social networking sites
http://www.passioncomputing.com.au/articles/the-social-impact-of-technology.aspx 

What concerns/ considerations are there (if any) for the media institutions involved in your case study as a result of the impact of new and digital media?

What concerns/ considerations are there (if any) for the media institutions involved in your case study as a result of the impact of new and digital media?

Three media institutions that I am studying are Youtube,Twitter and Facebook, these institutions are very much based around the new and digital media, and embrace it because they are the new and digital media. Since it has arisen these three media institutions have taken advantage of it, for example the rise of smartphones such as iPhone and androids, have goven them the chance to create apps for the phones so that they are accessible 24 hrs a day.

Facebooks floatation

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/feb/02/facebook-100bn-stock-market-flotation

Status update: going public. Valuation up to $100bn.

It started in a single Harvard dorm room as a way to connect often lonely students, then spread rapidly across Ivy League universities from a house in Palo Alto, before becoming the subject of a Hollywood hit film. Now the social network believes it has become so important to so many that it describes itself as a "social utility" without which, it is hoping, its worldwide total of 845 million users cannot function.

Facebook, created in 2004 by the then teenage Mark Zuckerberg, is now planning to float on the New York Stock Exchange or Nasdaq. It hopes it is worth $100bn – easily more than Barclays Bank or BAE Systems – an extraordinary sum of money for a business that was founded so few years ago. Its revenues may be an impressive-sounding $3.7bn in 2011, but the impending share offering demands that willing investors accept it is worth a stratospheric 27 times that revenue, a figure Rupert Murdoch has reckoned would make Apple "look really cheap".

The assumption is that Facebook will one day generate revenues to reach the $100bn mark, and in this game there can be only one comparison: Google. The world's favourite search engine went public in 2004, and delivered on the promise. In the year before its flotation, its revenues were just $961m, and its valuation demanded at the time was $23bn – at 24 times, similar to Facebook now. Today Google generates nearly $10bn a quarter, and its shares priced at $85 at issue are now $583.

If Facebook can repeat Google's trick it will demonstrate that for all the talk about the rise of India and China, it is still Silicon Valley that creates the most lucrative and innovative companies on the planet. And, while Facebook may exist only on desktops, tablets and mobile phones, theinternet is the frontier of our times, the place where fortunes of the size of Zuckerberg's paper $28bn can be made in the time it once may have taken to travel to and from the New World. Assuming, that is, Zuckerberg can meet the expectations placed upon him.

Brent Hoberman, who floated Lastminute.com in 2000, knows a little about the pressures of a highly priced float. When asked at the time if he was happy to get his company on to the London stock market, Hoberman was equivocal. "It was quite stressful really," he said. "We were valued for perfection, which put an incredible pressure on us." Lastminute's shares fell by as much 95% at the worst point, a reminder that the buzz of the moment is never enough if the underlying financial model does not convince.

Facebook starts with some advantages that a company like Lastminute did not have. It is already profitable, making $1bn after tax last year, and has amassed a cash pile of about $3.9bn. It has long won the battle to be the world's leading social network, and continues to grow financially, with revenues expected by some to hit $7bn in 2012. But while Google is the dominant player in a new advertising category, internet search, Facebook is competing in a melee for display advertising in which newspapers, broadcasters and a range of other popular websites chase revenue.

Its advocates argue that Facebook has the potential to become a force for change, developing in directions not immediately foreseen. The social network had developed its own currency, Facebook credits, and has become the host environment for other media, for Farmville and other games (which provide at least 12% of revenues), for Spotify in music and even the Guardian in news media.

It has the capacity, Hoberman argues, to be a "disruptive force" in industries ranging from games to payments, new areas such as telecommunications, and advertising, where the company is only beginning to exploit some of the possibilities of selling personally targeted ads. The challenge is whether it can do so without infringing users' privacy, although Hoberman argues that "people who think young people worry about that are out of touch".

More importantly, arguably, are the key personalities. Its success will depend a great deal on Zuckerberg. His letter to investors eulogised the importance of the "hacker way", a corporate republic based on coders who get things done, and his partnership with chief operating officer Sheryl Sandberg, the former Clinton era junior politico who handles the speaking, political and regulatory issues that the shy, geeky Zuckerberg does not. Success in the US technology industry depends to a surprising degree on the energy and vision of the founders – from the late Steve Jobs to Larry Page at Google demonstrating what can be achieved to the failure of Jerry Yang, who recently quit the long struggling Yahoo.

Popular knowledge of Zuckerberg – whose 28% personal stake plus control of votes from associates gives him control of his own destiny – derives largely from a script by Aaron Sorkin, whose Social Network film grossed $225m, rather modest by Facebook standards. It portrays a driven and somewhat ruthless executive whose masterwork is a response to being jilted by his girlfriend and who is prepared to drop his closest friend, Eduardo Saverin, as he gets ahead. It is not until the end do we learn that Zuckerberg and Saverin settled their dispute, with the Facebook founder helping ensure that he was left with a lucrative near-$5bn stake in yesterday's money. Not everybody can reward former friends so well.

The real Zuckerberg will have his own part to play. His success or otherwise in matching the $100bn of expectations will set the overall narrative for the next internet generation. In other words, the next five years.

Who are the primary target audience now and has this changed? Who was it before and how do you know?

Who are the primary target audience now and has this changed?  Who was it before and how do you know?  



3 media texts:
Facebook 
Twitter
YouTube


Facebook primary target audience

Facebooks primary target audience is everyone, it is available for anyone to use all over the world with 500 million users worldwide.
Facebook users:

• 54% women, 42% males 
• 29% being within the age of 18-25 
• 28% being in college

This shows that a huge majority of the 500 million people using Facebook is in college, this is probably due to the generation being brought up with technology. Audiences of this age tend to be more technology alliterate because they know how to use it, that being said the older generation to not use it as much with only 7% of users being 55 and over. 

Twitter users:

106 million users

• 52% women
• 48% men
• 30% are aged between 26-34
• 48% being in college

Twitter is a lot more popular amongst the older generation, perhaps because it is easier to use and not so interactive such as Facebook it. Facebook is a website that is available for everyone but popular amongst young people with twitter having the opposite effect on audiences 

Youtube

• 490 million users per month 
• 35 hours of video being uploaded each minute
• 48% female
• 52% male
• 51% of users are in college

http://socialmediasonar.com/youtube-infographic
• 28% are aged between 35-49

http://www.digitalsurgeons.com/facebook-vs-twitter-infographic/

Is the size of the audience any different now than before the impact of new and digital media (or has the pattern of usage changed)?

Is the size of the audience any different now than before the impact of new and digital media (or has the pattern of usage changed)? E.G. consider for the impact of new and digital media on TV broadcasting the change in audience ratings for programmes as a consequence of the deregulation of TV.  (Prior to deregulation audience figures could be 20m+ for Eastenders etc to a situation today where, due to the massive number of channels now available, audiences are vastly reduced and fragmented).


The audience for new and digital media has changed drastically, with the rise of new technology has steered audiences away from traditional types of media to the new and digital age. With institutions making information and media products only available on the new platform, audiences are forced to use this, for example the digital switch over, approximately 10 years ago the introduction of freeview boxes became available for people who wanted more of a range of channels for free. This made it optional for people who wanted it, meaning that audiences could either pay for satellite TV or continue using their basic 5 channels. However in April 2012 all audiences who own and watch the television will have to change to a freeview box if they only have 5 channels, with the basic five being scrapped and no longer available.
http://www.digitaltelevision.gov.uk/
Because of new technology coming out all the time, the older generation may find it hard to keep up with it all, there have been many worries that OAP's cannot cope with the new digital switch over and that it may be unfair to them, however help is provided to them so that they can keep up to date and learn how to use it. This will increase the amount of people using digital television because it is a permanent fixture and therefore meaning that everyone who wants to watch TV will have to do this in April.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6155518.stm

Also, there has been a dramatic drop in the regulation and audience number in newspapers, over the recent years the rise of new and digital media has caused big problems for newspaper institutions. For example, the Daily Telegraph had a readership of 1,751,000 in 2009, but in 2011 this dropped to 1,584,000, it is a small drop however they are still loosing part of their audience. This is due to the amount of news that appears online, although some newspapers are now available online there is difficulty trying to get and subscriptions that would provide the institutions with revenue. newspapers are doing anything to try and gain revenue and cut down their costs, for example The guardian have re-vamped the format of their newspaper again. Going from a "broadsheet to Berliner size it has undergone another redesign" this was to "save "on the cost of paper, ink and production""
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/22/guardian-changes-design-format

What impact has there been on the way in which the audience now consume the media products/ texts involved in your case study? How does it differ from what went before?

What impact has there been on the way in which the audience now consume the media products/ texts involved in your case study?  How does it differ from what went before?  

The consumption of media for the audience has changed dramatically in the past few years, the consumption of traditional media has dropped whilst digital media has risen as people are using technology more such as video games, social networking and television. Rupert Murdoch had hoped to "reverse" free news trend and introduced new paywalls on newspapers such as the Times on online for subscriptions. However this was widely rejected with 88% of consumers saying that they get "their online news free" and therefore found no need to pay for news that they could be getting for free. http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/apr/19/media-consumption-survey

The introduction of Web 2.0 has allowed consumers to make their own material for the internet, giving the internet a more pluralist platform on the internet as we know it today. It has given the audiences more power in what is said on the internet, more like a freedom of speech as they can respond to media in different ways unlike how marxists has originally intended whereby they were a passive audience. Audiences can now conform, accommodate, challenge or reject what they recieve in the media and this can be done over all three platforms. For example the introduction of Blogs has allowed users to create and provide others with their own opinions on things that they have seen may it be a story in the news, what they had witnessed during their day or opinions on the release of iOS5 for example. As this is available to anyone they want other people can then read these and gain a wider understanding of peoples views, this is a type of freedom of speech. Twitter has also contributed to this giving thier own users to "tweet" anything they wish, although it is still regulated, for example an MP Diane Abbot tweeting "White people love playing 'divide & rule' We should not play their game #tacticasoldascolonialism." This caused huge uproar amongt people on twitter and the public in general, with another MP pointing out it was racism, "MP Louise Mensch retweeted it with her addendum: "you what? <~~~ #racism"
Techinology has allowed people to use twitter anywhere and when ever they wish to, it being available on your desktop, laptop and phone, with tweeting becoming a whole lot easier and more accessible with iPhone.
Twitter has given audiences the power to recieve what they have read and react to it in anyway they want. In this case it was widely rejected, which if it hadnt been for the uprise in pluralism this would have been accepted. However, it still stands that some people may have agreed with what the politician said, but their opinion would not have been possible becuase of the ridicule that would have been recieved, showing that perhaps the internet is not so plural at all and does choose sides and it dominates like marxism does.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jan/05/diane-abbott-twitter-row-racism

However, there is the problem of online piracy as well; audiences can now access content that should be paid for, for free. For example, music, although it should be paid for by buying the CD on-line or in the shops, people now can go on websites that allow them to download the music for free. A recent bill that was proposed by the United States called SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) this anti piracy legislation caused some of the internet’s most influential sites such as Wikipedia to close down or 24 hours in protest to this. The American government wanted a type of control over the internet, and this is why it was set up, to stop other websites from torrenting and streaming for example without copyright. Megavideo and megaupload were closed down due to this act, one of the biggest online video sharing websites because the site had “violated piracy laws”. America have more than “$500 million in lost revenue” of revenue due to piracy

http://www.boosharticles.com/34593/megavideo-and-megaupload-are-shut-down-by-us-government

Audiences consume media through technology. With the introduction of increasingly more smartphones being introduced to meida audiences such as iphones and androids, it is a lot easier for audiences to access the media. There are now apps that allow audiences to catch up with television that they have missed on the go. The same goes for traditional types of media such as newspapers, these too can be accessed on your phone on the go, for example as you go to work. 

Has new and digital media had an impact upon ownership and control ofthe media institution(s) involved in your case study area?

Has new and digital media had an impact upon ownership and control of the media institution(s) involved in your case study area? Explain in detail any impact and what exactly has changed.

In terms of my case study and news institution that has been hugley affected by the new and digital media, that has contributed to new techonology and its audience is News Corp. In the recent problems with phone hacking, this has caused big problems for Rupert Murdoch and we are now seeing his corporation at stake. Citizen journalism is contributing to the fall of media institutions causing proffesional journalists to go to the extreme to get their news. Due to the rise in modern technology it has become possible for anyone to report news, from taking a normal mobile phone, recording a peice of footage and simply posting it up to a social networking site or youtube for example. Many stories in the news in recent times has come from this, with videos on youtube causing huge news stories such as "My tram experience" of a middle aged white woman who was racist to people on a tram, this made big news and eventually appeared on nearly all news stations.

Due to simple actions of the public, their stories are becoming more popular and wanted by the audience than what news institutions are actually providing us, their own material is simply not good enough anymore. Perhaps this is because journalists are simply not in the right place at the right time but citizens are, and therefore they are having to take other peoples material. This can cause huge desperation for media institutions such as News Corp, the phone hacking that had originally started with the death of a young girl Milly Dowler had caused a downward spiral for Rupert Murdoch and his empire as it was revealed her phone was hacked in order to get information for the news. A Leveson inquiry has been carried out for the past few months starting in September 2011, this has revealed that many people have been phone hacked with celebrities giving evidence to their phone hacking.

It seems that phone hacking was carried out in order to get more news for institutions, with the recent decline in newspaper sales, many of the journalists have been desperate for news, and this had all originally started with Rupert Murdochs newspaper "News of the World" that was forced to shut down in July 2011. This is what began the decline of Rupert murdochs empire.

"The phone-hacking firestorm will significantly weaken Rupert Murdoch’s hold on the News Corp empire, says Murdoch's biographer." A headline from the new zealand listener, reporting how news corp is declining, many believe that it will affect his hold on his empire and it has been suggested to him that he should sell his news international, which would release 40% of British newspapers. Journalist Michael Wolff says that the British newspaper industry "so poisoned"
http://www.listener.co.nz/commentary/the-decline-of-the-murdoch-empire/

New technology has also forced news institutions to try and keep up with it, again News Corp is struggling with this, newspapers are in decline and rupert murdoch is straining to keep up with it. In response to this newspapers are now widely available on the internet, rupert murdoch recently launched an online only newspaper in America called The Daily. This has failed hugely for Rupert Murdoch as it did not get as many sales it needed to even break even. Last year he annouced that he would "redefine the news" inthe words of Apple executive Eddy Cue. However, Rupert Murdoch had only achieved 80,000 subscribers, just 1/6 of what he needed to break even. This showing that keeping up with new technology is getting difficult, he has now joined Twitter in an attempt to keep up with technology.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/oct/03/rupert-murdoch-daily-subscribers

Another media institution that has been effected by new and digital media is Google, however unlike News corp, google has been impacted in a more positive way. Google has grown hugely over the past fews years, since 2010 it has almost doubled its revenue in one single year from $29,321,000 to $37,905,000 in 2011, making a profit of $11,742,000 in 2011. They had bought YouTube in 2006 for £1.65billion, by doing this they have allwoed them self to advertise using google to make some of their revenue. Youtube is a huge media institution that is used all over the world by millions of people, it holds billions of videos that are made up of artists and consumers. Every day people have been able to post their own videos of anything they wish onto youtube and some have even become incredibly famous.
http://investor.google.com/financial/tables.html

Google chrome is currently the new web browser for google and the second most used browser there is, and it is now been available on Android. Although google is available on all phones, chrome has only just been available on Android phones such as HTC's and other smartphones in an attempt to become more popular and used by media audiences. This has been in spite of the new technology that is available and how they have to keep up with it in order to appeal and keep its users.
Since the change of the layout of facebook in 2011, Google decided to take advantage of the amount of complaints that Facebook had recieved from its users and realyl began to market their new social networking site Google+,  although it was already available it was widely unknown and due to the changes of facebook, the number of users surged and has now "crossed the 90 million mark in one year". Facebook still has nearly 700 million users however, google were quickly catching up as people migrated to google+ "The Google+ has friendly layout and it is much conveniant to use in comparing to Facebook"
This shows that google are constantly coming up with ideas to help promote themselves and showing that they are keeping up with the technology and also keeping in with what audiences like, producing things that make them happy.
http://www.weeklyblitz.net/1823/users-outraged-at-facebook-new-layout-many
http://technorati.com/social-media/article/google-plus-crosses-90-million-user1/#ixzz1lmfNscxq

Case Study

Theory- Marxism
A Marxists view would be that of a capitalists society, where by the means of producing and distributing goods are owned by small groups of people, or people of a small minority. This being the elite class (Bourgeois), who dominate other classes, for example the working class (Proletariat's) working for elite class and selling their ability to work in order to get a wage from those in the elite class.
"Media is seen as a ideological arena in which various class views are fought out, although within the context of the dominance of certain classes"(Quote) This saying that one class dominates all over media, in print, e-media and broadcast. For example a Marxists view on Twitter may be that celebrities are the leading, dominating class because they are followed and admired by many people. Gaining millions of follows, and these "lower class" people follow because they admire and want to feel apart of their lives, admiring them and being influenced by the elite class.
Another example of Marxism is Rupert Murdoch with his company News Corp, Rupert Murdoch is the small minority that owns a huge majority of the media. This being a Marxist view because he is the main gatekeeper to what is published in the news, and his media products such as newspaper websites, newspapers and content aired on TV.
However, in contrast to this there is a Pluralist view (second theory) where by there are competing groups and interests, where none overcome each other, but are all predominant. "A basic symmetry is seen to exist between media institutions and their audiences" pluralism is mainly about equality with nothing and no one dominating each other. It is seen to allow audiences to manipulate the media in which ever way they want according to their needs and wants, giving the audience the power to 'conform, accommodate, challenge or reject, thinking independently.
For example, a pluralists view on twitter would be that audiences have their own free will to follow which ever celebrities they wish or not at all, allowing small arguments to arise on the social networking sites as pluralists can challenge or rejects celebrities tweets.

Debates/Issues
Being similar to hegemony, an issue that can be argued from a Marxists point of view is Rupert Murdoch owning News Corp and having control over many media companies. Rupert Murdoch is the small minority that owns a huge majority of the media. This being a Marxist view because he is the main gatekeeper to what is published in the news, and his media products such as newspaper websites, newspapers and content aired on TV.
A Marxists view on Twitter may be that celebrities are the leading, dominating class because they are followed and admired by many people. Gaining millions of follows, and these "lower class" people follow because they admire and want to feel apart of their lives, admiring them and being influenced by the elite class.
Another example of Marxism is Rupert Murdoch with his company News Corp, Rupert Murdoch is the small minority that owns a huge majority of the media. This being a Marxist view because he is the main gatekeeper to what is published in the news, and his media products such as newspaper websites, newspapers and content aired on TV.
http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/what_is_capitalism.php
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/marxism/marxism01.html

Theory-Hegemony
According to Gramsci, he defined hegemony as the predominance of one social class over others (Bourgeois) the ability of them more dominant class to project its own way of seeing the world so that those who are subordinated by it accept it as 'common sense' and 'natural'/'the way a subordinate class lives its subordination' (Quote)
http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/marxism/marxism10.html

Issues/Debates
Similar to Marxism, hegemony can again be applied to News Corp and Rupert Murdoch because he has control over so much of the media internationally, owning and controlling 70% of Australians newspapers. With the fear that Rupert Murdoch could "brainwash" and control what the Australian people would be seeing and reading, a vote was set against him to stop him from buying more of their media, as this could cause bias amongst the media creating moral panic amongst the people of Australia.
Another issue raised is SOPA, the Stop Online Piracy Act brought forward by the American congress in order to shut down piracy websites in America. This can be a huge debate as of recently because many websites and people are against the idea of stopping their freedom to speech, as the American government want main control over the internet. This is coming from a marxists views but it widely rejected by plurists because it will not be equal, as the American gorvenment will be the "small minority" that are dominating the larger majority of lower class proletariats.

Issues and debates- Pluralism
With pluralists being given the power to 'conform, accommodate, challenge or reject a text, this has allowed many argument with the media to arise. for example, Eastenders has aired an episode of a cot during last Christmas, this caused a huge uproar amongst the viewers who had seen that episode causing many debates on what had happened and how it had been shown and portrayed in the soap opera. Twitter was a social site that had brought up the issues, as many people had tweeted about their disgust with the story, and complaints of "EastEnders prompted 8,400 complaints to the corporation and 374 to media regulator Ofcom."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jan/07/eastenders-complaints-record-cot-death
Ben_Jardine tweeted: 'WTF are EastEnders writers doing? Plumbing new depths. Whoever wrote this story must be young, childless and trying too hard. Shame on you.' this shows that there is a more pluralist audience because they have not simply accepted the storyline, unlike a marxist most of the audience had completely rejected the storyline, of which was not intended by the producers. The most likely way that the producers encoded the text was to make the audience conform with the storyline, so that they could reach out to the mothers who may have been in a similar situation, and get the audience to agree with the possible feelings of the actress. However, pluralist audiences have decoded the text in a different way, being an active audience who recieve and interpet the media messages in different ways, similar to conform, accomodate, challenge and reject, this audience for eastenders has an opositional view on it, and therefore have disagreed with the message that is being brought across.
http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/851566-eastenders-fans-use-twitter-to-hit-out-at-sick-cot-death-storyline#ixzz1l7W8wV1T
New technology has allowed pluralists to express their views and cause debates unlike it was before, where marxists dominated much of the media. The invention of new phones such as Andriods and iPhone has created a new platform for pluralists to express their opinions to others. Web 2.0 has also allowed them to create their own content, such as blogs, to provide other audiences with their own thoughts and ideas on  issues that surround our society as we know it today. Twitter has become a social network that promotes a kind of free speech hugely, twitter is now available not only on the internet with a computer or laptop but in your pocket, on your iPhone or android phone, right there for you to tweet about anything, such as something you have merely seen on the street.

"the television station has already been taken before the first brick has even been thrown, distributed into the mobile phones in everyone's pocket"

http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/last-nights-tv--how-facebook-changed-the-world-the-arab-spring-bbc2-reel-history-of-britain-bbc2-2349711.html

Theory- Cultural Imperialism
http://www.thehumanist.org/humanist/articles/essay3mayjune04.pdf
http://gsevenier.free.fr/culturalImperialism.html
^^UNESCO= United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/last-nights-tv--how-facebook-changed-the-world-the-arab-spring-bbc2-reel-history-of-britain-bbc2-2349711.html
how the use of new technology has allowed people to report things within seconds of seeing it because it is avaiable to you on your phone in your pocket.
Facebook’s Zuckerberg: “Having two identities for yourself is an example of a lack of integrity” http://michaelzimmer.org/2010/05/14/facebooks-zuckerberg-having-two-identities-for-yourself-is-an-example-of-a-lack-of-integrity/

 

Step Three
My case study will involve new technology and its audience and how it impacts new and digital media. New technology impacts this area hugely on a very wide scale. New and digital media is all about current and upcoming technology, of which technology contributes to anyway. I have chosen to study this area and create a case study on it because
why is it rich for study?


Three media texts
Facebook
Twitter
Youtube