Become a Cyborg: Humans are outdated.

Image simulations or computer manipulation is suspect to the concept of “truth.” Simply framing a composition manipulates an image through the process of interpretation and authorship; cropping out surrounding imagery to anchor the semiotics. However, how has this manipulated our cultural understandings online? Furthermore, how do 'we' as a culture '[re-]invent' (Shaw, 2008, p.81) previous conceptions of embodiment in order to participate in an uprising online cultural development? Stiegler suggests that the 'human' (Stiegler, 1998, p.141) has re-appropriated social linguistics as he “invents himself in the technical by inventing the tool – by becoming exteriorised techno-logically.” (Stiegler, 1998, p.141) Contemporary culture is pivoted by upgrade; an unwearying perception of never becoming the 'ideal.' We continue to develop knowledge and understanding, continuously improving previous work; the 'previous work' of Shaw's influence being the body. In opposition to what is referred to as the 'docile' body; one of which is manipulated, shaped [and] trained' so that it 'obeys, responds, becomes skilful and increases forces', (Foucault, 1991 [1977], p.136) Western culture recognizes media as a cultural object - we don't want the physical exertion of repetitious work, instead we wish to work with computer based skills.

This brings forth a selection of epistemological questions: Is access to infinite amounts of information on the web instead of the 'human' mind (Stiegler, 1998, p.141) “dumbing down” culture? Is this perhaps artificial intelligence? Marx insists '[m]achinery is put to a wrong use, with the object of transforming the workman, from his very childhood, into part of a specialized machine', (Marx, 1990 [1867], p.547) however surely using online sourcing as an influence can be seen as less derivative with 'participatory culture'; (Jenkins, 2006, p.) 'increased levels of audience participation, creative involvement and democracy.' (Creeber, 2009, p.20) 'Bodies are obsolete.' (Shaw, 2008, p.87) Instead of enforcing outdated repression against New Media as a propitious 'tool', surely it would be more valuable as a cultural to embrace it as a 'virtual body'? (Shaw, 2008, p.86) Data needs a new discourse; new rules and new conventions.

'By observing people who suffered from varying forms of ataxia – a breakdown in this communication resulting in a loss of control over the simple actions necessary to respond to stimulus from immediate environment', (Shaw, 2008, p.89) Weiner observed how machinery can now mimic the 'characteristic activities' (Wiener, 1948, p.8) of the body. Images can become completely constructed from pixels with no truth, indexicality or authorship. This has developed from manipulation of an image to simulation of an image. Images become remodelled, rendered and structures according to no substantial origin; for example user avatars need no aesthetic source. There is no documentary evidence that is pure of source; and this can furthermore become enforced for the 'user', giving attributes to an online experience which may not be 'truth' or physically possible outside their 'virtual body.' (Shaw, 2008, p.86)

Bibliography:

Creeber, G. (2009) Digital Theory: Theorizing New Media & Cubitt, D. (2009) Case Study: Digital Aesthetics in Ed. Creeber, G. & Royston, M. (2009) 'Digital Cultures: Understanding New Media'; (Maidenstone: Open University Press)

Foucault, M. Burchell, G. Gordon, C. Miller, P. (1991) 'The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality'; (University of Chicago Press)

Jenkins, H. 2006. 'Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide'; (New York University Press)

Marx, K. (1990) 'Capital: Volume 1: A Critique of Political Economy'; (Penguin Classics; Reprint edition)

Shaw, D. (2008) 'Technoculture: The Key Concepts'; (Oxford Berg Press)

Stiegler, B. (1998) 'Technics and Time, 1: The Fault of Epimetheus'; (Stanford: Stanford University Press).

Wiener, N. (1948) 'Cybernetics, Second Edition: or the Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine'; (Cambridge: The MIT Press; second edition)

Convergence Culture

Convergence, defined in Henry Jenkins introductory chapter as "the flow of content across multiple media platforms" is becoming a part of our everyday lives. Instead of using an mp3 player for music, a camera for pictures and a camcorder for video, we have it all wrapped into one in the Smartphones that are on the market. This is possibly one of the reasons there are more and more interactive experiences with media. For example instead of just watching the TV show X Factor, you can now download an app which allows you to vote along with the judges during the auditions, making you feel like part of the show. However, taking Henry Jenkins example of American Idol, he states that "fans fear that their participation is marginal" (Jenkins, 2006, p.20). It could be the illusion of control and participation that entices an audience to watch. 
Although, in other forms of media, viewers do have more control. In Summer 2013, Microsoft revealed it's new console-the Xbox One. The console allows people to be watching a movie on Netflix, but also be on Skype talking to a friend; or watching TV and be notified that a multiplayer game is happening. Microsoft found a way to broaden it's audience by taking advantage of the culture we live in today. In a way, it epitomises Jenkins' "black box" (Jenkins, 2006, p.8), even though the book was written years before the Xbox One was even announced. However there was a lot of negative feedback from consumers about the console-stating that it wasn't made for gamers anymore. The pre-order sales figures up to 24th August 2013 show what the audience think; the PS4, Xbox's biggest rival, has 600,000 pre-orders where the Xbox One, even with all of it's applications and features, has only 350,000. This caused Xbox to backtrack in a lot of the features, making it more accessible for gamers to play. The audience clearly did not want to accept or wasn't ready for the change and Jenkins reiterates this in the introductory chapter of Convergence Culture;
"You can scarcely blame consumers for not knowing how to speak this new language...when so little previous effort has been made to educate them about convergence thinking". (Jenkins, 2006, p.8)
Media culture is changing rapidly, and society needs to catch up. 

________________________________________________________________________

References
Jenkins, Henry (2006) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York University Press.

Xbox One and Playstation 4 Pre-order sales figures accessed 12:50 09/10/13-http://www.vgchartz.com/article/251266/ps4-vs-xbox-one-pre-order-totals-to-august-24th-2013/

X Factor App http://xfactor.itv.com/2013/app/

Playstation 4 Information- accessed 20:18 09/10/13-
http://uk.playstation.com/ps4/

Xbox One Information- accessed 20:20 09/10/13-
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/xbox-one/meet-xbox-one?xr=shellnav

Convergence Culture: Rise of the Consumer (Jenkins: Convergence Culture)

Memes and other viral content are a product of media and other digital discourses. These are from new forms of consumptions, where individuals can now actively contribute. Referred to as a "collective intelligence," coined by French cybertheorist Pierre Lévy, (Jenkins, 2008, p.4) "consumption has become a collective process"; (Jenkins, 2008, p.3) for which this has become the ideal example. From a conceptual stance, media forms such as Youtube and Facebook act as a form of empowerment to the individual. As no specialist skills are needed to obtain partial authorship of cyberspace, there is now what Jenkins refers to as a 'participatory culture' in which there's an 'added incentive for us to talk among ourselves about the media we consume.' (Jenkins, 2008, p.3)

Emergent practice has now given access to an online mass media to publish their own work; contrasting to the public becoming a consumer. It has become a democratic process available for publishing; where immediate need for literacy or specialist skill are almost redundant. Progressively, user content has begun to shape new modes of consumption and production. For example, Twitter did not introduce the functionality of the 'hashtag', instead adapting this from user content. Presented within the text, a console was involved in a clever comparison to the well-known 'Trojan horse.' (Jenkins, 2008, p.8) The 'Trojan horse' being a historical ploy presented to an intended audience, however they were unaware of its content. A fundamental contrast from this adaptation could potentially highlight that technology, although contains content that is often advertised to create substantial public awareness, primarily relies on it's take on distribution; how it is adapted by the audience itself. Jenkins' rather unique take on this suggests that convergence culture is being 'smuggled' into our homes. (Jenkins, 2008, p.8) Although 'they had the technology to bring out convergence' they would still rely on an audience to indulge in it; 'they hadn't figured out why anyone would want it.' (Jenkins, 2008, p.8)

Bibliography:
Jenkins, Henry (2008) 'Convergence Culture: Where old and new media collide', New York University Press

A Case for Convergence

Jenkins makes a very strong argument in favor of media convergence for his introductory chapter (Jenkins, 2008). He does this by making the process itself clear, ensuring there are no misunderstands regarding the process of media convergence and the fact that no one media appliance can incite it, "(...) however sophisticated they may become." (Jenkins, 2008, p3). The reason for which being that as a process, "Convergence occurs within the brain of individual consumers."  (Jenkins, 2008, p3). Jenkins makes it explicitly clear he believes convergence is a natural process, powered by the demands of the consumers rather than the whims of the producers.

Jenkins goes on to further debunk any ideas of a fully fledged digital revolution forcing old to new media in a short time frame, he directly quotes Gilder, "The computer industry is converging with the television industry in the same sense that the automobile converged with the horse." (Gilder, 1994, p189). However, as Jenkins (p6) mentions all motion behind any revolution burst with the dot-com bubble.

The burst had shown that unless you had a very solid business plan such as Amazon or eBay, simply being digital, or labeling yourself as such on the stocks was not enough. To further debunk the idea, Jenkins cites the work of historian, Lisa Gitelman. Gitelman argues that there are two components to media, the delivery system and the protocols. Protocol can be carried across multiple delivery systems as they are improved over the years. As is so aptly quoted by Jenkins (p14), "Printed words did not kill spoken words. Cinema did not kill theater. Television did not kill radio." (Gitelman).

This is demonstrably clear, delivery systems are simply becoming more specialized. For example, you simply cannot watch a television in the car. You can however definitely listen to radio, thus the medium lives on as a niche that is only consumed within a specific context such as driving a car. The same can be said for the television, which is going to be the preferred delivery system of choice within the context of your living room. By considering real word examples, the idea of a complete displacement of old media seems erroneous as long as situations which restrict modes of consumption, or are unfavorable to new modes exist.

References

1. Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised, New York University Press.
2.  Gilder, G., 1994. Life after Television: The Coming Transformation of Media and American Life (New York: W. W. Norton)
3. Gitelman, L., Introduction: Media as Historical Subjects