Transmedia Storytelling

Link to Forums about Lost

Transmedia storytelling 101 is a very informative article that discusses the concept of Transmedia Storytelling. A definition of transmedia storytelling is a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience. This means that there is a type of “synergy” that is created, when different types of products come out all relating to, say for instance, a movie. This can be seen in the Matrix where comic books, animated series, novels and the actually movies worked together to form this type of synergy. Transmedia stores are based not on individual characters or specific plots, but rather complex worlds. These can have multiple interrelated characters and each of these having different stories. This then creates a phenomenon on encyclopedic impulses in both the readers and the writers. People are drawn to master what can be known about a world which always expands beyond their grasp. This impulse is completely different to the pleasure we associate with most classically constructed narratives, where we expect to finish the book or leave the theater knowing everything there needs to be known about the plot or story. This encyclopedic ambition can be seen in just about any of the television series that run in the primetime slot of most of the major networks.

Lost is a great example where this encyclopedic ambition can be seen. I myself am not a viewer of this series, but knew enough information to understand that this series is built on vastly complex characters and plot lines. I know friends that watch this show and all they talk about is how “lost” (ironic) they are in terms of the plot and what is going on. They are always telling me I can never watch the series because I would be so far behind in the plot, which I am sure, is true. Regardless my friends seem to have this encyclopedic impulse towards Lost. They are always trying to fill gaps or determine the extra details that might hint at clues to unfolding the entire plot. Jenkins discusses this in Transmedia 101. The viewers (in my case my friends) have a strong incentive to continue to elaborate on these story elements and work together with their speculations until they take on a life of their own. A great example of this can be seen in forums about the Lost series. Thousands of people go to these forums to gain answers, and fill these gaps about the series. One such instance is from tv.com and their forums about the series. One interesting forum I found was about the time delay that happens within the Lost series. If I understand correctly no one really knows exactly when this is happening or how long (If I understand correctly from what little I know). What this forum is trying to uncover is this time delay and how it is solved, but then at the same time it is ruled out. Thus, the viewers are still left in the dark. They are trying to use each other to figure out the plot “holes” and reveal the entire plot and the exact details of the show. This forums goes on with people trying to figure out what is going on and bouncing ideas off of each other. There are also multiple different forums on just this one website relating to Lost. There are thousands of other places where watchers can go to fill these ambitions that they have with relating to the plot.

Jenkins

Comic Book Guy - Fanatic

In Henry Jenkins article, “Get a Life!”: Fans, Poachers, Nomads, he refers to the concept of what a fan is. He first starts in by discussing what a fan started out as and a definition as literally, “Of or belonging to the temple, a temple servant, a devotee.” He comments that these fans are usually and frequently characterized as de-gendered, asexual or impotent. Jenkins also states that a fan will always remain a “fanatic” or false worshiper, whose interest are fundamentally alien to the realm of “normal” cultural experience and whose mentality is dangerously out of touch with reality. Basically his article is talking about how there are fans of say baseball and sports and then you have “fanatics” for such things as Star Trek, Star Wars or even following actors and actresses. These fans go above and beyond just watching the movies and shows, they try to become a character or live their lives entirely based upon these shows they are “fans” of. This even goes as far as Jenkins notes on page 13 of his article, “news reports frequently characterize fans as psychopaths whose frustrated fantasies of intimate relationships with starts or unsatisfied desires to achieve their own stardom take violent and antisocial forms.” This further reiterates the point that some of these “fans” go above and beyond, simply viewing or watching. These fans are not in touch with reality and as stated are often portrayed as being outcasts and not part of normal society.

The way of these people being portrayed as outcasts and cut off from society as social misfits can be seen on a very well known animated series; The Simpsons. This show, as many of you probably watch, features a character by the name of Comic Book Guy. Jenkins talks about how we classify these fans and this is no exception. Comic Book Guy is a stereotypical comic store owner and fanatic of comics. He is a bigger guy, hair in a pony-tail, a slob, no friends, and above all else a true comic fan. They regularly show him attending conventions where he is asking questions about an episode or comic book where he states the specific details about the particular book or episode, then wants to know even more about it. Usually the person that was staring in the feature has no clue what he is even talking about (showing how obsessed he actually is). This is showing that he is going above and beyond just viewing a particular episode or reading a comic book, he wants to be a part of it and lives his life by it. Bart and Millhouse regularly go into the shop and Comic Book Guy is very protective of his comics and they usually make fun of him for his appearance and “freak-like” nature. Jenkins talks about how fanatics are usually characterized as psychopaths take on this anti-social nature. This is no different when it comes to Comic Book Guy as he is probably the most anti-social character featured on the show. It is interesting how we see these types of fanatics in the media or in a YouTube video and in all places, an animated series. Comic Book Guy might not be a real person, but the creators have portrayed him exactly how Jenkins talks about how a fanatic is portrayed in real life.

Sugar and Spice - Flickr

Click here for the link to our Flickr slideshow!

Our Flickr assignment was actually really fun. I was a bit skeptical about the project at first since no one in the class really knew each other and we had to go explore out into campus to try to find something interesting to take pictures of. As far as the preparation work that was done, in the class before we had decided on some different ideas. Our first idea that we had involved taking photos of a student waiting for the bus on Third Street. Obviously we all know how this process goes, sometimes getting left behind, sometimes not having anywhere to sit. We decided not to go with this idea because it would be during the time when most people were in class so no one would be there to photo. Our next idea came as a bowling experience in the Union. We had everything planned out to take pictures and of course when we got there, the bowling alley was closed. We then had to think quickly on our feet to come up with a new idea, we figured the bookstore would be a great alternative. We were going to do this somehow by, trying to portray a student buying book and then spending a fortune at the cash register. After taking a few pictures we actually got kicked out because it is a Barnes and Nobles and you cannot take pictures inside their stores. This lead to our final idea of going through the transaction of buying a product at the store, Sugar and Spice. We had someone walk in, ask what was good, contemplate buying a water, standing in line, paying for the product and walking out. Overall the idea worked really well and as you can see from the link above the pictures turned out great.

Flickr was not difficult to use at all. We sat down and literally had our pictures on the Internet in 5 minutes. Which leads to way this technology can be a great citizen-based photojournalism tool. It would be a great tool because as I said, it is extremely easy to use and takes seconds to get your pictures online. The article, How Flickr single-handedly invented collaborative photojournalism, talks about how people took pictures of the French Employment Riots and how high quality and fast they appeared on the internet. This goes to show that no matter the event, the public can post pictures online as soon as they are taken. This means that instead of just 4 or 5 media outlets showing images, they can come from hundreds of people posting their pictures on Flickr with comments about what the picture is. Then others can share their pictures and have the Flickr team use their secret algorithm to put those pictures that have the most “interestingness” up front. No longer will you need these news outlets to piece together the stories for you, Flickr has allowed for ordinary citizens to do it themselves and revolutionize the way photojournalism is used. Obviously our photo story was not about Riots or a Obama rally, but still it shows how effective the tool can be. Maybe someone did not know about the store Sugar and Spice, but decided to search for it on Google. Theoretically our blogs are out there where we have all documented a trip to the store. An ordinary citizen can see the pictures and see what the store looks like without having to even go or try to find information on the IMU website. Same concept applies when pictures are taken of a political rally. Instead of trying to watch the news, just jump on Flickr and check it out.

Jenkins

Link to the article discussed further into the blog post: HERE

Henry Jenkins discusses in Photoshop for Democracy on page 317 of the readings the concept of spin in politics. This concept basically means that all of the spokespersons for that particular campaign are using a set of “talking points” that are used by everyone to interpret an event or topic. Everyone knows the talking points for the particular event and will continue to use the same points to talk about the party. Whether you are a party member on the Anderson Coopers show or giving an appearance on David Letterman, everyone knows exactly what should be talked about with each particular event or topic. In the past the public has not been able to pick up on this spin in the political parties, but now the public is becoming more aware of these methods of politics. Jenkins talks about how Kerry made an announcement to the supporters through email about his running mate. This turned around and had the Republicans come out with talking points about Edwards that gave details about his political career, voting record in the Senate and his comments on the political trail. This was all done to make sure that when Republican Party members were asked about Kerry or Edwards they would all know exactly what to say (good or bad). This has also allowed the uninformed public to pick up on these talking points to make sure they know what to talk about when they are having dinner with friends or a conversation on the bus. It creates a stir and gets everyone involved, once again whether it is good or bad. This goes even deeper because then bloggers start using the talking points or a concerned voter calling into a show about a candidate or even on our best friend Twitter. To Kerry he thought that this notification of his running mate would be a great idea, but it turned out only to hurt him and tarnish his running mate because the GOP came right back with these talking points to ensure that the public knew of Edwards before Kerry or Edwards could even get to the public. I say well played by the Republican Party, just as Jenkins has mentioned about spin, the public knows what it is now, but this does not stop them from using these talking points to help inform themselves about politics. While Kerry was hoping to gain the edge, he only tarnished himself. This whole concept of political spin and talking points used by parties can be seen in the article that has been linked to above. This follows exactly what Jenkins is talking about with how spin is used by the parties to develop talking points and then the public just uses these points and run with them, only thinking that this is what to believe. Senator Clinton made the comment before the Iowa caucuses in January 2008, “I’m in and I’m in to win.” Then, the following comment was made before the start of the caucuses, “As the presidential candidates engage in furious pre-caucus spin, one of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s most prominent Iowa supporters said Wednesday that she’s already accomplished what she needs to in Iowa, and can declare success even if she finishes in third place.” This just goes to show how the comment made by Hilary before the Iowa caucuses was made to state that she was in and in to win. Then however right before the actual caucuses were held a supporter then stated that even if she came in third she would still win. A win nonetheless? This article might be short but it is giving an example of how spin is used and these “talking points” are followed by the supporters. She was in to win, but even if she finished third she would win either way. The party wants you to believe that whatever they say, and in this case it is about winning, and whatever the outcome is, it will be spun to make it out their way. Jenkins touched on this with the Kerry example. Even though he tried to come out with a way to gain advantages by emailing about his running mate the GOP party used this to gain political spin about the candidate before Kerry knew what hit him. Turned out it did not work for Kerry. It was turned around and used by the Republicans as a way to gain an upper hand. This is just the same as Clinton did by proclaiming she was a winner whatever the outcome. So down the road even if she did come in third she is still a winner. Do we really want to have a candidate that is always spinning and trying to make the public believe what they want us to believe, as the article states? We need to know when an event is happening that the facts we receive are the truth and that the public is educated on this event and the real truth.

Rheingold

My blog for class on Monday is similar to the concept that Rheingold talked about with people overseas and especially in China and Singapore being able to use their cell phones to purchase items from a vending machine. The concept hit very close to home for me because I once had a similar idea, let me explain. I go to Florida quite regularly on breaks and have always gone to the same place, Naples. My family has a place down there that we have had for quite some time and it is nice to go down to relax. If you are familiar with the area Naples has quite a few wealthy individuals that fly in on private jets or sail their yachts. I usually go down with one of my friends and we always see these planes flying in and boats out in the Gulf. We always say "some day....some day" We sit on the beach and for hours on end we will try to think of different business ideas that could get us in that position to be that person flying in on that jet. About a year ago we finally hit on an idea, and that was using your cell phone to be able to pay bills, send transactions between bank accounts, send money to friends, or have your mom send you money while at college. All over the use of cell phones and text messages. Our idea actually came to us while at dinner when the check came all on one bill, it is always a hassle to have to pay your friends back or say, "ill get you on the next dinner." We thought why not be able to do this on your cell phone, somehow access your bank account and transfer money on your cell phone to your friends cell phone. Or when you go into Sports on a Friday or Saturday night, why not being able to send them a text message in order to pay the cover. Another example, what about being able to pay your rent out of your account while sitting in class because you forgot to mail the check. All of these ideas go right along with Rheingold speaking on the cell phone being able to help your purchase things or pay for things. Turns out, this technology is actually out there (I can't seem to find the link right now, but I'll keep searching) and it is available almost exactly as how I described it. This technology is just creating more of a mobile atmosphere and taking away from the human aspects of these tasks. What happened to just calling your mom and asking her to drive to the bank, deposit money, then you do laundry. This disappears with the use of this mobile technology, just a text and a transfer and no words even have to be spoken.

I know this post is different than a link or a YouTube video, but I thought it was really relevant to an idea that I had quite a while ago about the same types of technology. Just goes to show how much this mobile technology is affecting our lives and how much it is making us rely on mobile technology and not human interaction. Like I said I will continue to search and then post on twitter the link to this technology (as far as I know this was the only one out there in the US at the time).

Open Source Democracy

One of the topics that we have discussed in class on the Rushkoff was the give and take the Internet has given rise to. This is specifically seen in which “one-click” checkouts at online retailers have become more popular as a means of checkout for the consumer. The article in question comes from infoworld.com and the link can be found at the bottom of the post. We all know that the Internet has caused us to watch less TV and according to Rushkoff, 9 hours less. This means that now people are not seeing these advertisements for products on TV and therefore must rely on consumer’s online presence to gain sales. While TV still uses product placement and advertisement that are appealing to consumers, once consumers are online, there must be a way to keep them there to buy the product. When you are accessing the Internet and see an article, YouTube video or come across a new song from ITunes, you might be interested in buying the product. While the give and take has been achieved by now showing you these products online instead of through the TV ads or product placement a way to get consumers to buy is next in order. The article from inforworld talks about how once a customer fills a “virtually cart” most of them forget about it, never to see it again. While if you were in a grocery store this might not be the best option since you are physically leaving a cart sitting there, but in the online world it vanishes as quick as it was created. People are not interested in taking the time to fill out the address requirements, billing requirements and all of the hassle that comes with online purchases. Must consumers are used to going to the store and swiping the card and the transaction is complete. So one way in which this can be solved is through the use of this “one-click” checkout. There are programs out there that can be installed on your PC that allow you to basically upload your information with one click, so that you are saved the hassle of having to entered all of the information. The downside of this is that you are installing software and it can only be used on that PC. From my standpoint this is a major disadvantage because I know I have bought items before while out of town or while in a computer lab. The alternative option is to trust you data to a server held by a third party. To me this throws up flags left and right, I would never want my data to be stored by someone I do not know. The security hazard of them obtaining my credit card number is something that I do not want to face. Thus, we are faced with this give and take that Rushkoff spoke of. While we can go online and “virtually” select products to purchase, we are faced with the issues presented with being able to upload our information quickly in order to buy the product. Some might find this method easier, while other hesitant to use it. Only time will tell if our “one-click” world will be transformed into a normal everyday occurrence.

Link : HERE