maandag 28 september 2015

Miley, Whats Good?



Miley Cyrus was recently the host of the MTV Video Music Awards. The fact that she was able to host such a well-known event solo in her own style signifies her current place at the top of the pop world.
                                                               
Part of what makes Miley’s story resonate with fans is what Robin James calls the neoliberal feminist idea of “Look I Overcame[1], Miley’s background has allowed her to overcome. Currently ideas of marketable feminism require that perceived strong females survive. A strong woman is not like other girls: she is unique and has over come the patriarchal system on her own.  In doing this, however, the strong woman enforces the system they seek to overcome. Miley’s narrative is a standard version of this story.

Miley started off young in the entertainment business as the star of a popular television show controlled by Disney.  Miley had to conform to the ideas of young femininity that Disney wanted to promote. Her break away from that image is forever tied with it. Mileys current persona is dependent on that beginning.  No one would care that she is now someone who rides giant hotdogs on stage, sticks her tongue out, wears provocative clothing and dances with drag queens if they didn’t have the image of her starting out as a young country singer.
Without the knowledge of her past she would just be another singer trying to be wacky to get talked about, instead of someone that people genuinely do talk about.

The Miley that existed since Hannah Montana first went on the air in 2006 has overcome Disney’s hold on her and “broken out “of a system which she says caused her to suffer from body dysmorphia and emotional trauma[2]. She has accepted that she is damaged by the system and now profits from it (like other Disney Stars have also done, for example Demi Lovato).

The self-realization is according to James nothing new, it is part of the traditional overcoming narrative. First there is the whole undamaged person, then something negative happens, then suffering and finally self-awareness and growth[3].  This idea is always about improvement and in this modern western neoliberal society betterment equals money and the accumulation of it.  

To overcome and be this new “strong” version of herself, Miley needed the system to tell her what she needed to overcome, that same system informs her now that she is strong. She is still dependent on and plays to the system that she acts like she broke out of.  The wording is just different. It used to tell her to be like the other girls and now it says “don’t be like the other girls”. Both ideals of femininity depend on the system’s idea of the “other girls”.


Now she has moved on and can control her own image. This would not have been possible to do unless her Disney career had provided her with the economic capital to move on.  Getting past a crisis instead of slipping further in is not free, as James states it requires money and privilege to break out[4].   

Miley can afford to act a certain way because she still relies on the system to keep her relevant. She presents herself the way she wants because she comes from the right narrative whereas others have not “earned” their way into dressing or behaving as she does.  Other artists may act or dress similarly to her get criticised because they do not fit into the narrative that has promoted Miley.  There are differences in class and race that prevent others from benefiting from this system of success. They may have “overcome their damage” but not in the way that the current music and media industry has decided they want to story to play out. Miley’s freedom of expression is bound by narrative and not open to everyone.

The resources she has gained from this have allowed her to now work relatively independently and produce and release her latest album (Miley Cyrus and Her Dead Petz)  for free.

However, Miley’s free album might not be as free as its seems

The music is indeed available immediately through free streaming[5] via the website Soundcloud. This is in direct contrast to other artists like Taylor Swift, who have recently been increasingly regulating and monetizing their content.  However, Miley’s free access comes with a catch, there is no other (official) way to access this music.

In this current musical climate as talked about in Raphael Nowak’s article Understating Everyday Uses of Music Technologies in the Digital Age, music is no longer experienced through a single channel but interacted with across multiple platforms for multiple reasons[6].

The attempt to be accessible to everyone through free streaming cuts off access to it. She assumes that the way that she would want to access that music is the same way as listener would and doesn’t give them a chance to interact with music in a way that they would choose to.  There are so many options now in regards to the music experience this singular access is restrictive. She takes away the agency of the listener and tells them how to interact with the music.

There are no obvious download links and the album is only available via streaming services which require the listener to be connected to the internet. A listener must always be connected to the digital world. They cannot take the music out of that world the way you could with a CD or Mp3 download.  The music is accessible but not mobile. This limits the places the music can be listened to and cuts off fans who may not have access or only have limited access to internet services. The album is free but it is not free at all times for all people.

Nowak states that in the digital age many people still interact with the physical objects even in music. CD sales may be declining but artists have been putting out special editions of CDs or vinyl records for those fans who like to own physical objects[7]. The fact that they can get an album for free is great but fans are aware of the fact that the artist doesn’t get paid when this happens. When people want to really support an artist they want to be able to buy something from them. There is a ritual here. It may be a commercial ritual but it also allows fans to clearly tell an artist what they like (album sells well) or what they don’t (album bombs) and to be part of the music process in their own way.  By limiting Her Dead Petz release to a singular free digital platform Miley ignores the fans importance as part of the music industry and further denies them agency.


She doesn’t need them anymore. She doesn’t care if people buy her album or not, her album is for her. The free access is not about her listeners; its about her. Its about her being better than other artists because she can afford to release this album for free where other artists still need to sell their albums.

 Miley’s current success doesn’t benefit others like she may claim it does. She may not have made money off Her Dead Petz but the constant mentions of her in the press and the way she announced her album (on stage at the VMAs during her time as host), have allowed her to continue to be in the public eye, perform and profit from things other than her album sales.  Miley’s resilience as a pop artist with the ability to put out a free album, relies on the fact that she is part of the neoliberal conception of a strong woman.  

The album is free but the image continues to sell.

Thesis: Resilience 'feminism' is just another form of oppression



FM, LB, BBB, MM, YB








[1] James, Robin. "Look I Overcame ." In Resilience & Melancholy: Pop Music, Feminism, Neoliberalism, by Robin James, 78-124. John Hunt Publishing , 2015. Pg. 79

[2] Glock, Allison. "Miley Cyrus Marie Claire September 2015 Cover Interview." Marie Claire.com. August 7, 2015. http://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a15323/miley-cyrus-september-2015 (accessed Septmber 25, 2015).

[3] James 2015 Pg. 83
[4] James 2015 Pg. 86
[5]  Streaming in this case is the continuous transmission of data over the internet
[6] Nowak 2014 Pg. 149
[7] Nowak 2014 pg. 150

maandag 21 september 2015

Transmediali-TV








 
Transmediali-TV

TV shows like the British Sherlock or the Dutch TV show Wie is de Mol? are much more than just your regular cable TV shows. These shows use several platforms like internet, tv and other media to create an intricate web that offers the audience a “puzzle” across media (transmedia) that they can interact with. Both cases allow the viewer to engage with the show in various channels and media. In this blogpost, these two examples of transmedia storytelling will be discussed and compared in order to explore how audience reception of such TV-programmes have changed by new media—specifically the Internet.

Henry Jenkins, an authority on Convergence Culture, coined the term transmedia storytelling for storytelling that is done through several media platforms that each have a specific and unique value and contribute to the story as a whole.[1] As such, transmedia and narrative are closely connected. Transmedia tells a story, from beginning to end, using different media. Each medium can tell a part of the story, and each platform contributes to the story, but can also be viewed separately.
 As transmedia storytelling relies on audiences to engage and participate on more than one level, this type of storytelling is often linked to fan cultures or fandom. As Maura Edmond argues, internet has increased opportunities for interactivity and participation, which in turn changed the culture of audience reception from passive spectators to more active fans.[2]

One TV-show that has accumulated a massive fanbase is the BBC series Sherlock, which places Arthur Conan Doyle’s famous detective into 21st century London. Sherlock Holmes and his friend and flatmate John Watson solve crimes and mysteries using modern-day technology like Internet and GPS and smart phones. The success of Sherlock resulted in the continuation of the story in other media. An official companion book to the series, Sherlock: The Casebook written by Guy Adams, was published by BBC Books. Moreover, in Japan, Sherlock has been made into a manga comic series adaptation.
  

In the series, both Sherlock Holmes and John Watson have their own websites, that are sometimes used or mentioned in the episodes. Sherlock has a homepage called thescienceofdeduction.co.uk and Watson’s blog is johnwatsonblog.co.uk. Both websites are available on the internet for the audience to visit. These two examples of tie-in media (that support the transmedia storytelling) serve to extend the fictional world of the TV-series, as they also feature cases that are not (yet) covered in the series.

The second case study, Wie is de Mol? (English: Who is the Mole?) is a Dutch game show in which ten well-known Dutch people have to perform tasks and challenges in order to earn as much money as possible. However, one of the contestants is the Mole, and sabotages the game in secret. The contestants have to guess who the Mole is in order to win the amount of money the group collects with the challenges. Each week, the contestants have to answer questions about the Mole, and the contestant with the least correct answers is sent home. In order to remain in the game, a contestant will try to look suspicious in order for others to think that he or she is the Mole, so he can hunt the real Mole.


The TV show is aired every week by AVRO on the channel Nederland 1. Immediately after, the episode is followed by the Moltalk, in which contestants from previous seasons discuss the episode with the Moltalk presenters. The day after, a special Radio show, the Roodshow, discusses the episode and offers an exclusive report of the contestant that was sent home. The official website by AVROTROS features the latest episodes, as well as short biographies of the contestants and hints about the Mole. More hints are also provided by ‘the Mole’ himself via a twitter account (@ikbendemol). This twitter account, in combination with other social media like Facebook, allows viewers to discuss the hints and exchange theories. However, the main platform to exchange theories about the identity of the Mole is the forum on the officialwebsite. In 2014, an official Wie is de Mol? App was launched, in which viewers can play along each week and award points to contestants they consider suspicious.


Both these shows have received critical acclaim and several awards. Sherlock has won a BAFTA award in 2011 and numerous Emmy awards, and Wie is de Mol? has won the Televizier-ring, a Dutch television award in 2013. Perhaps, the fact that these shows can be enjoyed on more than one platform accounts for the success of these shows, as it allows the viewers to immerse themselves into the world that is created. In addition, both shows largely revolve around mystery-solving. Sherlock and Wie is de Mol? have both spurred a huge amount of fan speculation. The mystery encourages the audience’s playful interaction with the material. Many fan theories started emerging on the Internet as soon as the season 2 finale of Sherlock had aired, there was almost the same amount of solve-the-mystery going on as with Wie is de Mol?.

Yet, Wie is de Mol? is a different kind of transmedia storytelling, because it is not fictional; it is a game show with real people. It therefore does not fit in with Henry Jenkins definition of the term transmedia storytelling, who underlines the fictional and narrative aspect in his definition. In contrast to Sherlock, the transmedial aspect of Wie is de Mol? only allows the viewer to play the game along with the contestants in the show, whereas in Sherlock the transmedial practices serve to support the complexity of the fictional world. It could therefore be argued that Wie is de Mol? offers transmedia interaction instead of storytelling.

Still, in both cases internet culture and interaction with other fans play a big role. Transmedia storytelling and interaction relies heavily on the active audience and fans for the success of their story. The fans, in turn, often feel like a community through a shared interest and investment in these TV shows. These TV-shows understand the need for cultural participation and the need to serve fans who feel invested in characters like Sherlock. [3] The different layers and platforms like the Internet allow both general viewers and fans “to relate to and connect with the property on multiple levels”. [4] This participation can for example be seen in the proliferation of Sherlock Holmes fan fiction and fan videos on the internet. These fans use media “to produce fictional stories and share them with a community” and “to engage with narratives across a range of media platforms and collaboratively participate in them”. [5]

Transmedia storytelling is thus often accompanied by a more active and participating audience than regular linear television. The rise of Internet as a space to engage with texts like Sherlock and Wie is de Mol?, and the transmedial nature of these TV-shows has changed how the audience interacts with the show.

Thesis: Stories that use multiplatform resources to the fullest will be able to reach the widest audience.

FM, LB, BBB, MM, YB


[1] www.henryjenkins.org “Transmedia 202: Further Reflections.”
[2] Maura Edmond (2014), ‘Here We Go Again: Music Videos after YouTube’, in: Television & New Media 15 (4), p. 313-314.
[3] Derek Johnson (2012), ‘Cinematic Destiny: Marvel Studios and the Trade Stories of Industrial Convergence’, in: Cinema Journal 52 (1), p. 21.
[4] Aaron Smith (2011), ‘Beyond the Brick: Narrativizing LEGO in the Digital Age’ p. 9.


[5] Aaron Smith (2011), ‘Beyond the Brick: Narrativizing LEGO in the Digital Age’ p. 18.

maandag 14 september 2015

Empowering the Business and the Consumers


In 2012 Facebook acquisitioned Instagram, followed by WhatsApp in 2014. It might be considered as one of the biggest social media acquisitions in the past few years. However, the WhatsApp acquisition was indeed Facebook’s biggest app purchase since then. The Mark Zuckerberg’s kingdom paid $1 billion for Instagram and $19 billion for WhatsApp[1]. Such a big amount of money spent is a proof that Facebook obviously wanted to empower itself through the convergence.
Despite being labeled as the pioneer in social media phenomenon, Facebook has experienced a a declining number of users[2]. On the other hand, the new kids on the block, Instagram and WhatsApp, are becoming increasingly popular[3].  We can see that, although they have different functions in digital industry, users are still the vital part of their existence. Facebook and Instagram are part of the social media, WhatsApp is a text-based chat application, but all of them have a similar primary function: to connect people. Therefore, the reason why Facebook bought Instagram and WhatsApp is more or less similar: to acquire whoever they see as big rivals and to minimalize potential competition in the future.[4]
This acquisition can be categorized as economic convergence as Facebook looks for new business models as well as wider market. As we mentioned above, before the acquisition, there was a decreasing level of Facebook users. After the acquisition, Facebook users still showed a hesitant rising, but the amount of Instagram users rose to 23% in 2013.[5] Moreover, Instagram now has advertisements. Therefore, not only Facebook as a company grew larger than before (thanks to Instagram and  WhatsApp), a new improved business model was also applied to its sub-companies. Of course, in the end it was all designed to make more profit and to sustain the company.
Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp are different platforms, with different content and a distinctive presentation. Facebook was established as desktop-based website, with the mobile version arriving later. Both Instagram and WhatsApp are mobile-based applications, with a desktop version that was developed later, yet the system is still primarily mobile based. Therefore, it is clear that actually they are based on different platforms and on how they make use of the technology. They also have different ways to “connect people”. Facebook is a pioneer of sharing stories in the digital era, but if a user specifically loves photography, then Instagram would be his choice. On the other hand, WhatsApp facilitates people for a real-time text and phone chatting, as well as video and audio messaging. The merge of these three company not only has an impact on the economy sector, but also on socio-cultural. The socio-cultural convergence has an impact on how the merge creating transmedia storytelling accross platforms[6].
Facebook is supposed to be to have broader audience, since it can share different contents from photos, videos, links, stories, even places and events. Instagram has a more specific audience because it can only share photos and videos. WhatsApp is a different story as it is a messaging application, not a social medium, and it has also a specific area of service. Instagram and WhatsApp are new players in digital industry, but their growth is something that should be considered. Therefore, we believe a corporate convergence is a really good maneuver to sustain Facebook’s digital power. The merge of different platforms, area of service, and audience creates a  great chance of profit increase as well as cultural influence among their audience.
Another example of media convergence can be seen on various business sectors Fashion TV (FTV) has managed throughout the year. The entertainment company was started by Poland-born Michel Adam. He started with his own club, CafĂ© Fashion, in Paris. Due to his close  connection to the fashion industry, he then established a satellite-based fashion and lifestyle broadcasting, Fashion TV in 1997. It is broadcasted in 193 countries across five continents. The company has been expanded to multiple business sectors since then, which include website (fashiontv.com), a mobile application, alcohol and non-alcohol beverage products (F Beverage), love-f-cafe in various European cities, as well as various merchandise products.[7]
From European-based broadcasting media, Fashion TV has been expanding to other countries outside the continent, both in South East Asia and Middle East Asia. It became an international company. The expansion has created a global convergence in which the company distributes its cultural goods multi-directionally around the world[8]. The television channel broadcasts a range of fashion shows, lifestyle events, and jet set parties from around the world. It was able to blur the borders between culture in each country with its world-wide contents without forgetting to highlight the local contents as well.
The expansion of the company to other types of business service was obviously to gain more profit. However, there was also a need to create another business model to support to the recent one. Globalization demands a faster and more practical news distribution, consequently the launch of Fashion TV website was an act to sustain the company mission in distributing its contents. Furthermore, reporting social events and parties are also some of the highlighted contents in Fashion TV. The company saw an opportunity to expand the business and its audience by becoming the hosts of some events, by launching its own cafes (love-f-cafe) and producing its own drinking products (F Beverage). Hence, through a grassroots convergence that the company has established, Fashion TV has empowered the consumers play by shaping an extension of production and distribution[9]
Producing drinks and merchandise has created an economic commodity to the company. Fashion TV has not only broadcasting contents from other sources, but it has also created its own intellectual properties to enhance profitability. This is an obviously economic and cultural synergy within the company. The company’s growth has improved the scale of business model within it, as well as developed its textual products[10].
The merge of social media and mobile application (Facebook – Instagram – WhatsApp) as well as the long-term improvement of Fashion TV are supposed to create significant implications in economic, social, and cultural sector within the company. One similar thing we could find on these cases is that both couldn’t resist an expansion to the digital industry. As companies which have a strong connection with creative industries, digital evolution is something that could not be avoided in socio-cultural convergence.

Thesis:
Synergy and convergence are not new, but digitalization is speeding up the process and is enabling businesses to reach an international audience.

Sources