Week9: Respond to content

I chose to do my essay on the impact of computer/video gaming, on the youth of our society, because I feel its influence has had overwhelming results. I am in a position of negativity towards this topic, however am interested in researching the positive effects of gaming.

To ensure I touch on all aspects of this topic, I will have to do my research, and focus on five main elements of the essay.

1.       Defining youth of today

2.       Defining video games of today

3.       Positive effects of gaming on youth

4.       Negative effects of gaming on youth

5.       Factual information and experiences to reinforce this argument.

http://www.skuggen.com/2010/08/addiction-to-video-games-curable-with-medicine/

I have heard of the term ‘Video game addiction’, and would like to become more familiar with what this addiction entails. I would also like to look into the death of the South Korean man, who at 28 years old, died after playing ‘Starcraft’ (computer game), for 50 hours, without sleep and food. Having heard of this story, I couldn’t believe that such a mindless gaming world, in my opinion, could be this brutal. Maybe I was wrong? Maybe it isn’t such a mindless world?

This triggered my desire to take on this essay topic!

Week9: Tutorial task

Sign an e-petition:

After searching the internet for the definition of an e-petition, I came across many; however my favourite was a petition to ‘Restore Capital Punishment’. It has 29,684 signatures, and if anyone else is interested in signing it, the petition will close on the 04/02/2010.

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions

Respond to a professional blogger at a major news site:

I had a look through a few news blogging sites, but rather enjoyed reading a particular blog from ‘The Herald’, titled ‘Blogging, Privacy and the new Facebook’. I even left a response on the blog. Take a look…

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://www.blogherald.com/2011/09/23/blogging-privacy-and-the-new-facebook/

What is Barak Obama up to today?

According to Twitter, Obama is trying to expose the ‘Buffet Rule’ today. That is his newest approach to taxes, where millionaires are being pressured to pay their ‘fair share’. 14 hours ago he posted a ‘Friday Fact’, along with a link for his Twitter followers to understand this ‘Buffet Rule’ concept in simpler terms. So, clearly he is busy tweeting today!

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://twitter.com/#!/BARACKOBAMA

What are the Australian Government’s plans to censor the internet (the so called ‘Clean Feed’)?

“The Australian Federal Labor Government has a ‘plan’ (since late 2007) to mandate that ISPs block adults' access to Internet content on a secret blacklist, compiled by a government agency, that the Government deems unsuitable for adults.”

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://libertus.net/censor/isp-blocking/au-govplan.html

When will the NBN get to your place? What are the benefits?

There is no precise date of when the National Broadband Network, however it is expected that within the next 8 years, Australian homes will receive superfast broadband connection.

Benefits:

• ‘Connect 90 per cent of all Australian homes, schools and workplaces with broadband services, with speeds of up to 100 megabits per second - 100 times faster than those currently used by many households and businesses.’
• ‘Connect all other premises in Australia with next generation wireless and satellite technologies that will deliver broadband speeds of 12 megabits per second.’
• ‘Directly support up to 25,000 local jobs every year, on average, over the eight (8) year life of the project.’

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard.aspx?pid=4026

Find out who your local, state and federal representatives are.

LOCAL: Mayor Cr Ron Clarke

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/t_standard2.aspx?pid=346

STATE: Mr Peter Joesph Lawlor MP

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://www.goldcoast.qld.gov.au/attachment/factsheets/fs357_government_members.pdf

FEDERAL: Senator Hon Joe Ludwig

(Viewed 19 September 2011)

http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/senators/homepages/senators.asp?id=84N

Week8: Respond to Content

COPYRIGHT for dummies… the basics.

http://www.copyrightauthority.com/copyright-symbol/

Copyright is a serious issue in relation to the internet, and seems to be becoming more and more complex, as technology evolves. ‘Intellectual property is a natural field for economic analysis of law, and copyright is an important form of intellectual property.’ (Landes & Poser 1989, pg. 326)

If I were to re-write a paragraph, word for word, from the novel ‘To Kill a Mocking bird’, by Harper Lee, without referencing the quote or acknowledging that it is the words of Lee, this scenario would be completely illegal. The same applies to the internet. If I were to take a licensed YouTube clip and re-post it under my name, regardless of how amuture the clip may be, this is an illegal action.

However, if I were to download a recipe for strawberry muffins from the internet, and re-create the recipe, this is completely legal.

So, what is the difference?

The term ‘re-write’, and ‘re-post’, used in my example’s above, are completely different, in this case, to the term ‘re-create’. If we are re-creating something, the re-creation will be different to its original. However, if we simply ‘re-post’ something, the original text or image remains the same. Therefore, it’s copyright.

‘While the cost of creating a work subject to copyright protection – for example, a book, movie, song, ballet, lithograph, map, business directory, or computer software program –is often high, the cost of reproducing the work, whether by the creator or to whom he has made it available, is often low.’ (Landes & Poser 1989) Furthermore, once copies are available to others, additional copies become even cheaper to reproduce. This is a key driving incentive behind the action of copyright.  

Copyright is complex, but ultimately necessary. Without copyright, no one could own the right to their own original ideas.

References:

Landes, W & Poser, R 1989, An Economic Analysis of Copyright Law, Vol. 18 no. 2, viewed 23 September, via JSTOR database, http://www.warsystems.hu/wp-content/uploads_bodo/An%20Economic%20Analysis%20of%20Copyright%20Law.pdf

Week8: Tutorial task

STEP 3: Final process of movie making

Our final days of movie making consisted of putting together all our findings, including YouTube parody eHarmony video bio’s, amusing profile pictures, and other YouTube clips on cyber dating. However, if we were to simply embed these clips into ‘Prezi’, the presentation wouldn’t flow like a movie. So, our next use of software was ‘Screen-o-Matic’, in which is a free downloaded program that records anything onto your computer.

After recording our YouTube footage to the computer, we used Windows media ‘movie-maker’, and converged all our footage together into a movie. This would give us a flow of parody clips to embed into ‘Prezi’. Once embedding the clips into ‘Prezi’, we added a few of our own words, including ‘rules’, and ‘sign-up’ tips.

As excited as we were that finally our audio visual movie was finished, and we were proud of our work, I had to ask myself:

DO WE OWN THIS PRODUCTION?

Beginning the process of making our movie, I would have laughed at such a question, and answered ‘Yes, of course’, but having been through the process, and releasing how strict copyright laws are, my answer now is confused!

In a sense, yes we do own this production as it is on the software ‘Prezi’, and we are not uploading it onto the internet. So, within the confines of our own computer desktop, I suppose that yes, this production is ours. However, we are not uploading our film onto the internet for a significant reason.

Unsure of whether our YouTube clips are Creative commons, or licensed, means that we must be careful with uploading our movie onto anything, because of copyright. If we were to release this clip into the public, at the very least, we would have to reference all of our footage. And, even then, referencing might not be enough!

This process has truly exposed to me the complexities of copyright!

(Lauren, my group’s film has been sent to you through email)

Week7: Respond to Content

Kind words for Wikipedia!

Wikipedia is often shoved to the side as an unworthy source of information. This is sensible as the articles are open for editing, thus open for mistakes and false information.  But! Wikipedia certainly isn’t unworthy of positive attention…

http://www.moongrabber.com/misc/the-problem-with-wikipedia-today

Wikipedia contains over 3 million articles, and more than a million people a day visit the website (Rosenzweig 2006, pg. 117-116). Its wide spread influence, despite its reputation for containing incorrect information, is noticeable world-wide. Ask yourself, how many times have you been desperate for a quick definition, or a briefing of history, and Wikipedia has been the click of your mouse? Wikipedia’s accessibility, availability of articles, and constant re-editing of work, makes it the most up-to-date encyclopaedia you will find (Lengel 2006, para. 6). The ‘reference’ list at the bottom of every Wikipedia source is a great beginning to your research. Amongst these advantages, the two most important in my opinion, are as follows:

Freedom:

‘Wikipedia is entirely free!’(Rosenzweig 2006) Anyone with internet can access Wikipedia for free, unlike some scholarly journals where one has to pay and subscribe. Plus, Wikipedia is free to use. People can take information from Wikipedia and put it in their website, or even publish it in a book. The freedom of use and information, suggests why the encyclopaedia is widely read and cited.

Culture:

Wikipedia ‘channels all resources around the world into a sharing vessel.’(Fan 2008, para.5) Creating a Cultural based ‘vessel’ of information means that multiple authors, per article, has voluntarily published their knowledge, without the acknowledgment of themselves, to collaboratively create history. Having writers of various ages allows for a broader audience.

Although Wikipedia has its disadvantages, it cannot be denied that its influence has certainly changed the way we write history.

References:

Rosenzweig, R 2006, Can History Be Open Source? Wikipedia and the Future of the Past, Vol 93, no. 1, pg. 117-118, viewed 21 September 2011, via Oxford Journals

http://ecpdata.mdsa.net/sources_secondary/rosenzweig-highres.pdf

Lengel, J 2006, Teaching with Technology, viewed 21 September 2011, http://powertolearn.typepad.com/digital_smarts_blog/media_literacy/page/5/

Fan, KH 2008, The Advantages of Wikipedia, viewed 21 September 2011, http://fankanghsin.blogspot.com/2008/04/advantages-of-wikipedia.html

Week7: Tutorial task

STEP 2: (Middle of movie making process)

Keeping to our original plan of online dating prevention was difficult, as all the content we were finding seemed to reflect a witty approach, so we changed our concept slightly, by keeping with the idea of online dating, but making fun of the concept instead of seriously addressing the issue. We also decided to base our movie on clips from YouTube and written conversations between dating online couples.

However, the next problem we had to face was the issue of copyright. Taking YouTube clips that are licensed, and making out own film out of these clips, is essentially illegal, therefore we had to find a solution to work around this issue. We also had to find software that was going to allow us to create this film.

To avoid copyright, we decided the simplest way would be to adopt the software ‘Prezi’, which was free, downloaded from the net. The software overrides the issue of copyright, and creates a ‘movie’ like presentation. Group member Shannen took the reins of using ‘Prezi’.

Instead of having a story line to the movie, we wanted a collaboration of different online dating disasters, and online dating rules of what not to do. So, our next step was to find content. And having ‘Prezi’ certainly gave us a broader use of the internet.

Week6: Respond to content

Downloading movies... A.K.A Stealing from Hollywood.

Once upon a time, a ticket to the talkies was an exciting experience for the public. People would pay to watch a Hollywood ‘hit’ on the big screen. In today’s world, the purchasing of silver disks is just as pleasing. And, for people who aren’t quite satisfied enough, the copying of films illegally from the internet, often allow its downloader to pay little or nothing, and to be one of first in line to watch it.

The film industry, on average, loses about $3 billion dollars every year as a result of piracy (Engelman & Scott 2004, pg. 4). ‘Technology has made it possible to pirate both movies and music in little time, with little effort and with little to no quality distortion’ (Engelman & Scott 2004). With this in mind, I decided to do some research in terms of ‘highest grossing films’. And these are my findings:

In 1997, the film ‘Titanic’ made $600,779,824 in the US box office (All-Time USA Box office 2011, para.1). It wasn’t until twelve years later, in 2009, that ‘Avatar’ made $760,505,847, beating ‘Titanic’ (All-Time USA Box office 2011).



http://anonymousradioshow.wordpress.com/2009/04/15/coming-up-for-air/



I am in no position to state that within those twelve years, the rise of movie downloading had an effect or any relation to the prevention of other films grossing as much as ‘Titanic’ in box-office sales, but I am certainly curious. In 1998, the establishment of ‘Napster’, allowing people to ‘file share’ over the internet, began the phase of downloading films and audio files (Chapman 2009, para.10). By 2003, movie downloading had become such an issue that Warner Brothers, producers of the film the ‘The Last Samurai’, ‘hand-delivered copies to projection rooms, searched theatres for recording devices, installed metal detectors, searched for and seized cameras and camera phones, and hired staff to walk the aisles with night-vision goggles.’ (Engelman & Scott 2004) The film was a success, however the early web availability of the movie, emphasises the power of downloading.

It is estimated that approximately 400,000 to 600,000 movies are downloaded every day (Engelman & Scott 2004). Hollywood film producers have a struggle on their hands. Can the film industry fight the internet and it's downloader's? Or should downloading films simply be embraced? The answer is unknown, but one thing is certain… the internet’s power and influence, will result in a very difficult battle.

References:

Engelman, A & Scott, D 2004, Arrgh! Hollywood Targets Internet Piracy, Richmond Journal of Law and Technology, vol. 11 no. 1, viewed 20 September 2011, via Hein online Database, http://jolt.richmond.edu/v11i1/article3.pdf

All-Time USA Box office 2004, viewed 20 September 2011, http://www.imdb.com/boxoffice/alltimegross

Chapman, C 2009, The History of the Internet in a Nutshell, viewed 20 September 2011, http://sixrevisions.com/resources/the-history-of-the-internet-in-a-nutshell/