The Great Seduction

1. In the case of Democratized media, Keen seems to tie it with the idea of people recycling material made by various artists, designers and creators and using it towards a media that is used in a collage style or used style. He seems to take a side that does not support such a movement in media. He goes on to say that this type of media gives them the opportunity to distort the truth in their choosing and "destroys and kills media." This is also something he advocates in his book that he endorsed on the Colbert Report. His explanations are best exemplified by the website of YouTube. Anybody and recycle, reuse or throw together any footage they want in a distorted or perverse way that is their own spin on such forms of video or film. It will have them form a "creation" that he would most likely feel is stealing art and destroying what is good media.

2. Keen and Rushkoff differ heavily in their view on media. Andrew Keen takes a side that sees new media as the destruction of media as a whole and will continue to diminish and decline in merit. Douglas Rushkoff, on the other hand, views these new media advancements along with newer techonology as a way to enhance and add healthy growth to the new media that is coming to us. Rushkoff believes this will add a human element to media and be able to represent the normal person as they see media and the world. I believe that Keen's view does show slightly more merit when you take a look at the decline in the film industry. Not only have films declined in sales, but the internet has been able to distribute films on user sites for free, illegally. It has seem to construe with the idea that "anybody can be a film-maker or actor" with the internet's wide variety of video hosting sites (most prominent YouTube) and the modern computers run-of-the-mill and standard webcams and editing software. Has this diminished film quality?

Student review- Brendan Cuddihy

After reading Brendan's essay, it is clear about the growing risks of social networking with the case of cyberbullying/hazing on the internet. Recent current events add to the relevance of this essay with the case of the Rutgers suicide of 2010. "Three out of four teenagers say they were bulied online at least once during the last 12 months." This says a lot to hold the truth to his argument and puts it into perspective of just how far the negative aspects of this realm has become. It's a reality that may even be affecting a person as we speak. For all intents and purposes, you could do it instantly right now! Open a new tab next to this page and see for yourself (Note: Don't actually do that!).

Brendan Cuddihy

The Age of The Yet to Be Discovered

What would you say on a video that you wanted to post online? Its more than likely, it seems, that you’re going to put that video on YouTube, probably in hopes that it will be the next “David After Dentist,” “Techno Viking,” or “I Like Turtles.” The thought of people seeing something that represents your creativity, accidental or formatted, makes you all the more interested to put up a submission. Why do you do this? How do you do this? How does your submission hold any merit? Do the others?

With the rise of software and equipment that is made readily available for computer users, it has never been easier to make a video. The push of a button will film you with a web cam, record your voice, and convey whatever message you wish, warts and all. The quality of film, however, suffers due to the low resolution available on you devices and editing software. You could utilize it in ways to give a certain quality that adds personality to the amateur nature, but will it still be as organic as, let’s say, a short film shot with a Super 16 film or a hand-drawn rotoscope animation?

A trend seems to have formed where the quality of people’s videos is diminishing, focusing on the content more than the presentation. This does give the correct information needed, but the reputability may suffer because of the presentation. What if the next big scientific breakthrough were to be delivered in an online video shot on a Mac’s web cam and edited to have the speaker in a poorly cropped in an inappropriate background setting (i.e. choppy green screen effect). Do you believe that the professionalism of the matter would suffer? 

Professionally shot material seems to hold its own as a means to present information with a level of serious that amateur quality cannot always master. The care and detail of lighting, contrast, color correction, sound quality, subject placement and overall organization give off care and detail that can’t always be matched using home software or free software. Sometimes, the overuse of software makes its organic feel too tapered. Using too much effects or editing will decrease the quality in the presentation, thereby, acting as a distraction to the viewer. Professionally shot material seems to becoming less and less used mainly due to cost. This is more than likely a sign of the recent recession and unemployment rating that hinders people’s ability to afford such resources. Nevertheless, it’s these same investments that will grab more eyes and ears from superiors over the run-of –the-mill cell phone produced presentations.

It seems more evident than ever that people are “here” and have their presence, but can an example such as this in the form of video reflect that of online writings, journals, posts, photographs or other sources? Does it give off the amateur feel too much? Does it standout as “professional?” Is it even conveying what you want? 

We may hold and give a lot of value to the posts and opinions that are shown by the individuals online who may claim to be experts in their field, having some afire of professionalism. Can you accurately gauge the formality of this person(s) credentials through a computer screen as accurately as you think? 

Some people argue that the “amateur” market is something that is here to stay within the media, with most of its prowess being on the Internet. Some have said that using this source, as a tool will help an individual hone in one their skills in media and soon be able to move to more professional endeavors. This could include television, newspapers, more successful internet outlets, radio, online radio. What needs to be done about the growing age of the amateur writer is already being put into use with the young and old who may consider themselves in this category. They are learning. 

This overabundance of amateur websites, YouTube channels, and other media outlets that allow customization and freeform styles will give users the tools in order to prepare for their careers. It will allow them to master their writing, video, audio, and other media skills that will become more professional and presentable with experience and other outlets along their desires. This is how professionalism is staying alive. The amateur culture may be growing, but so are the amount of damage it may have done to film may show in the future in a way.

With the rise of so many amateur videos, it is becoming ever more prominent in the film and television industries as sources and citations. It effects the writing in a way, as well. Since the amateur writing may not have been taken as much care, the professional delivery of the message may not be as clear or may not present any valid merit to the viewer and will hold valueless to the broad audience. Not only this, but the presentation may suffer from the seemingly drab writing style that is used in the source. This also can apply to the filming style, heavily. The pixel reliant cameras will have the quality of the film suffer from drowned and watered quality that may be HD, but will not hold the same quality and warm tonality as the analog format that helped to shape them.

       Even though the digital format is dominating the media, there will always be a place for analog and digital amateurs can have a place. The amateur videos will always exist, and they will always hold a place as the starting point for perhaps the next great American film artist. Who knows? Maybe they'll be able to give insight into modern writing and analog/digital film with the amateur age of YouTube, giving it different perspective and crystalizing its value.