Thursday, 13 January 2011
Friday, 7 January 2011
WACA curator thrives on pressure for perfection
By Cheryl Bromley
“Welcome to the WACA” greets you as you enter the ground from gate two.
The print boldly stamped on the east stand’s grey exterior.
On the left is the shed which is the working home for the most significant person, next to the players, for the up-and-coming Western Australian cricket season, and more importantly, the third Ashes Test in December.
Women’s pay gap widening
By Katherine Dumont
Imagine checking your bank account balance and realising that you hadn't been paid for months.
You ask around the office at work and discover all your male colleagues have been paid on time and in full.
How might you feel if – after putting in all those hours, reaching your targets and hitting all those key performance indicators (KPI’s) – you hadn’t received a cent, while every man at your company had no such trouble?
Power Band or Power Scam?
Written by Geoff Mason
In today’s highly competitive sporting world, it is well documented that athletes will try almost anything to get an advantage over their competitors.
Over the last decade the sporting world has been shaken by an increase in the illegal use of performance enhancing drugs with hundreds of athletes being caught every year.
Coalmine Opponents predict disaster for Margaret River
By James Mahoney
Clean air and beautiful beaches mixed in with towering natural forests of Karri and Jarrah that open out onto fertile hills and small plains and wines that are amongst the finest in the world.
That is what makes up the Margaret River Wine and Tourism Region and what the locals are fighting to protect.
New gadgets creates new languages
By Melanie Dunn
Do you remember the days when the prime source of information was not a news App on your iPhone, but a bulletin on the television, radio or even an article in a newspaper?
And when you wanted to talk to someone that lived far away, you either had to ring them on the telephone or send them a letter through the mail.
In a world where technology is ever-evolving and people are relying on the media, the internet and social media for much of their day-to-day life, the idea of having to send a letter to someone for the purpose of keeping in touch may seem ludicrous to today’s youth.
The rapid explosion of social networking and microblogging websites such as Facebook, Twitter and MySpace has resulted in an alarmingly high reliance on technology for people to see what is happening in the world around them, as well as seeing what their friends are doing.
“These days people can’t live without technology and we almost feel ‘naked’ without it,” says Curtin University Communications student Samantha Clews.
“It’s a way of keeping in contact with people as well as a way of expressing ourselves,” Ms Clews says.
Similarly, the growth in social networking has been fuelled by the transition from internet on a computer to mobile phones that are also capable of connecting to the internet.
Through this increased internet and social media activity, a new language had begun to develop between users, sometimes known as ‘text language’.
Although convenient and quick to type, this particular way of speaking may be affecting the way that people speak verbally in everyday situations and as a result, their interpersonal communication skills are said to be starting to suffer due to dependence on nonverbal interactions.
In recent years, examiners have had to clearly direct students not to use ‘text language’ in their written examination papers, which is a clear example of how large an impact non-face-to-face interaction is having on today’s youth.
So this begs the question: why have forms of social media such as Facebook, Twitter and the products of the Apple empire (in particular) become so engaging?
“The increased user-engagement on Facebook is due to the proliferation of third-party applications; particularly ones that serve a useful function, such as travel planners or book-sharing programs,” according to Sandra Hanchard, a senior analyst with the Experian Hitwise website.
“Additional features for connecting users, such as ‘People You May Know’ has also helped increase user traction on Facebook,” she said.
So, it is popular due to the ability to keep in touch with one another and because there are applications that are actually useful for day to day activities.
We live in a society that depends on the swift communication of information in order to keep our lives rolling and today people cannot seem to live without some form of technology.
While it may be distressing to see how reliant we are becoming on technology, this cultural phenomenon can also be seen as a window of opportunity for businesses and politicians to promote themselves or a company.
“Social networking is now an essential part of peoples’ daily online routine, providing a level of engagement and reach that far exceeds most other content categories,” according to Will Hodgman, the executive vice president for the Asia-Pacific region for comScore in a press release.
“Understanding how to leverage this audience successfully is both a challenge and a significant opportunity for most digital marketers today,” he said.
It is likely that many Australian politicians have accepted the challenge as an opportunity to reach the young generations and convey their message in an effort to connect with them.
Certainly former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd embraced the opportunity and started using Twitter and, although mocked on television shows such as Rove and Yes We CanBerra! for this, he continued to use the microblogging site as a way to communicate with the people.
The reliance on technology by a global audience is growing at an alarming rate as the world becomes more modern and technologies are manufactured or updated.
Apple, for example, is almost singlehandedly responsible for the introduction of portable music devices of the 21st Century, and has since then grown to become an important part of peoples’ lives, not necessarily through social networking, but through music.
The Apple iPod was a breakthrough in portable music technology and the company brought out different versions of the original design at a phenomenal rate.
It seemed that no sooner had the iPod Classic come onto the market, when they released the iPod Mini, followed by the iPod Nano, the iPod Shuffle, the iPod Touch and more recently, the introduction of the iPad.
One YouTube clip addressed the rapid release of the first few iPods (which at the time were becoming smaller in size), claiming they were all soon to be redundant due to the introduction of the iPod Invisii, an iPod that was so small that it appeared invisible.
Although somewhat satirical, it can be considered as a glimpse into the future when, not only will the original iPods be unavailable anymore, but other forms of media are wiped out in the technology boom.
In the near future, print media such as newspapers, magazines and books could be seen as redundant as these forms of media are becoming readily available for little or no fee online or on an iPad.
This change is becoming evident in schools as they are now embracing the technology boom by introducing the iPod Touch as an educational tool.
“Every Year 8 student at Warwick Senior High School has been given an iPod to use during class and school hours to research, access school-created information and download relevant applications,” the West Australian’s Jayne Rickard wrote On 27 October 2010.
The article quoted Warwick science Teacher Mark Weber as saying: “It is also about changing what we do in the classroom to embrace technology”.
It is clear that social networking and technologies are becoming fully integrated into our daily communication and this is especially evident if you happen to be sitting on a train or bus.
The odds are very high that there will be a large proportion of commuters listening to a portable music device such as an iPod, watching something on their iPhone or iPad, texting at the speed of lightning, or maybe doing a combination of the three.
Even at work, people always check their phones as soon as they get on their break and may even Tweet about how boring their day has been and how they would like to be at the beach, all in under 140 characters of course.
However, in many institutions and workplaces social networking and microblogging sites have been barred on computers.
This indicates that people are becoming so reliant on these sites that they cannot go more than a few hours without checking their accounts.
“I think that people now rely on these 'new' media too much,” says Curtin University Communications student Tom Atkins.
“If you look at Facebook, you see people disabling their accounts in order to keep from going on when they have an assignment due,” he says.
Although it appears to be having a negative impact on peoples’ daily lives, there is also the issue of convenience when it comes to social networking sites, as Mr Atkins points out.
“I reckon people are using Facebook and Twitter so much, mostly because it's a quick and easy way to get in touch with each other, especially if people are on different phone networks to you so that it's not free to text or call,” he says.
So although we have the ability to call or text someone, we still are resorting to social networking and microblogging sites to communicate with one another.
When it comes to social networking though, in all its forms, is it appropriate to be divulging so much information to an internet site that over 500 million people can access?
Although there are privacy settings that can be activated so that certain aspects of one’s profile are not visible to someone that is not a ‘friend’, “people are realising that what they put on Facebook can be seen by anyone and everyone, no matter the privacy limits they have on their page,” says Mr Atkins.
“I think that although these social networking sites are incredibly popular now, their popularity will decrease with time though they'll probably need to be given an alternative, like one that contains Skype and Facebook possibilities but has no real privacy concerns,” he says.
This is what happened to one of the ‘original’ social media websites MySpace; it died out because Facebook came along and offered more than they could.
So it seems inevitable that social media will continue to grow in both popularity and content as technology advances and the impact that this will have on us as a population is likely to be both disastrous, in terms of interpersonal skills, and revolutionary, in terms of the increased use and dependence on particular media.
So yes, the idea of sending a friend a letter just to say ‘hi’ does seem quite ludicrous to today’s youth, but it is coming to a point where we have to embrace the change and adapt to the imminent technological lifestyle that is ever-evolving and is just beyond the horizon.
Crims beware: More cameras are watching you
By Elisia Seeber
In a quiet city car park a tall man with shaggy brown hair gets out of his car.
He is talking on the phone as he pulls a clear bag out of his front jeans pocket.
He tips out a bunch of ecstasy pills onto the bonnet of his car.
He looks around, checking to see if anyone is watching and continues to go about his business.
VIDEO: Building Safer Communities
A fierce cyclone that struck Fiji in late 2008 claimed lives and destroyed buildings, leaving communities devastated. One building that was extensively damaged was the Loreto Primary School. See how Caritas Australia helped the community to rebuild a safer school in the aftermath of the disaster and learn about disaster preparedness in a unique community education project in partnership with University of Notre Dame and Scitech.
VIDEO: Blueprint for a Better World
See what people said when they visited the exhibition opening at the University of Notre Dame in Fremantle! Blueprint for a Better World is an interactive exhibition which travelled around Australia. The exhibition showed the general public how the eight Millennium Development Goals can help end poverty and injustice in our world. www.blueprintforabetterworld.org
VIDEO: Caritas Australia, Stories from the field
Originaly published on Caristas.org.au
The Solomon Islands is an archipelago located in the south west pacific region between Papua New Guinea and Vanuatu. Over the past 10 years the nation has struggled through disasters, ethnic tensions and severe political upheaval. Caritas Australia has significant experience responding to the islands’ challenges and works extensively with communities to develop long-lasting opportunities for peace and security.
Following years of ethnically-motivated violence, a coup in January 2000, and the subsequent collapse of leadership and state services, Caritas Australia recognised the need to work throughout local communities in the Solomon Islands to rebuild positive community engagement through education, sport and environmental initiatives. Caritas Australia works to develop positive models of leadership, promote gender equality, facilitate peace building and establish community concern for the environment to restore livelihoods and build local capacity in the Solomon Islands.
These four short clips document some of Caritas Australia's development projects in the Solomon Islands.
In 2009 Caritas Australia was amongst the first to provide relief to families displaced by the 2009 floods in Takaboru. Watch how Caritas Australia helped communities to rebuild and recover from their loss.
HELP: Links
I have compiled this list of links to news services that may be of interest, some are traditional news services like the ABC, others are New-Media news sites that have become part of the journalistic landscape. Also included are some resources--such as Media & Arts Alliance and RSF
Local News
World News
Other Links
Wednesday, 5 January 2011
ESSAY: Describe the impact of piracy
Describe the impact of piracy, p2p and/or file sharing on the digital distribution of media.
In 2007 Radiohead, a popular musical act released their seventh studio album, In Rainbows in a way not seen before from such a well known musical, act: They made their album available to download, at a cost decided by the consumer, from the bands website—as well as making a hard copy available to be purchased by fans in conventional music stores1. It was big music conceding defeat in the digital distribution war.
The distribution of media through piracy, even p2p is not a new phenomenon. Video piracy was widespread with the consumer availability of VHS recorders, software piracy plagued developers since programming shifted from hard-coded chips to the floppy disk, and music piracy was no different2. With technological advances come new methods of breaking the law, it must follow then that legislation needs to keep up-to-date with emerging technological trends.
Digital distribution of music was not a new concept for the music industry3 in 2007, the time this white surrender flag was waved. By 2007 the case of Napster was long in the past and Apple’s iTunes store was now five years old. The music listening public had made their choice and it was up to the artists and record labels to catch up—people were not going to stop downloading music, (no matter what the cost?).
Not so much that’s it was the musicians themselves, as most of them shared their voice with the people in the battle cry for digital distribution, Acts as diverse as pop music’s Moby4 and Prince; New Metal band Slipknot; and the anti-establishment political rap group Public Enemy5 had been long advocates of digital distribution; In the case of Public Enemy, this stance put them up against their own label: Def Jam6. The record label, the face of the enemy.
Recording companies were the biggest opponents of digital distribution, primarily because it was seen to undermine their position in the music industry heavyweights, the generals and brigadiers leading their elite squads of musical acts in the pursuit of money and fame. The record companies saw digital distribution as synonymous with piracy and responded with legal actions against its proponents—both those end users downloading music, but also those that put in place the infrastructure to accomplish this.
Sony was one recording company that had tried, and failed horribly to counter digital distribution in 2005 with their DRM software7. People who had brought compact disks legitimately, were the casualties, a root-kit installed on a users computer once the CD was inserted into the optical drive, making the users computer vulnerable to malicious code. It was the wrong approach, for the kids of generation Y, downloading music was seen as a rebellion against an over-zealous corporate establishment8. Punishment for rebellion would only prove counter productive.
Apple, makers of designer electronics, had taken a different tact. Unlike Sony, Apple did not see digital distribution as a threat to their existing business model. Apple may not have had the massive back catalogue of music it owned rights to, but it did have dominance over the MP3 player market, so the choice to embrace digital distribution with its iTunes store could be seen as less of a risk. By October 2007, Apple had secured rights to distribute “digital” boxed sets from 1970’s super group Led Zeppelin9, people would still download music, even if they did have to pay for it.
Legislation was seen as something that needed to be brought into line with the emerging technologies, legislation that was fair to both user, creator and publisher. After the Napster case hit US courts, a “Digital Recording Act” was proposed10. Without a legal framework corporate interests would still look at digital distribution with an eye of mistrust, they needed a guarantee of return-of-investment on their stockpile of music11.
What the success of the Apple model of distribution, over Sony’s DRM failure taught musicians was that the old paradigm of selling music was becoming obsolete, and it followed that the record companies themselves were obsolete. Artists could do away with the corporate drill, and take on their own means of getting their music to their audience. Bands had taken on this endeavor before, as militant anti-government rap group Public Enemy had done. But popular music had yet to free itself from the corporate hierarchy—that was until an internationally known pop band Radiohead released “In Rainbows”, in its first month online over a million copies were downloaded taking US$3 million, from 40% of those users choosing to pay. At an average of $6(US)12, proving digital distribution can still be lucrative for the artist.
What the significance of In Rainbows had to the digital distribution of media was not a technological one, but a larger cultural paradigm shift. Indy bands, and militant rappers had embraced the technology before, but this was confined to smaller sub-cultures. The mass adoption of digital distribution had been proven effective, and it wasn’t until In Rainbows was this acknowledged by anyone from within the corporate music mainstream. This act meant not that the battle lines had been redrawn, but that the war was finally over.
1. Wikipedia, “In Rainbows” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Rainbows
2. Kembrew McLeod, 2005, “MP3s Are Killing Home Taping: The Rise of Internet Distribution and Its Challenge to the Major Label Music Monopoly”
3. Sean Ebare, 2004, “Digital music and subculture: Sharing files sharing styles”
4. Moby, “Napster” 2001 www.moby.com/journal/2001-01-29/napster.html
5. John Borland, 2000, “Rapper Chuck-D throws his weight behind Napster” news.cnet.com/2100-1023-239917.html
6. MTV News, 2000 “Public Enemy Leaves Def Jam, Will Distribute Next Album Online” www.mtv.com/news/articles/1427080/19990114/chuck_d.jhtml
7. Molly Wood, 2005, Cnet News, “DRM This!” www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-6376177-1.html
8. Carrie James, 2009 “Young People, Ethics and Digital Media”, Page 53, MIT Press
9. Apple Co, (Press Release) 28th October 2007, “Led Zeppelin Digital Box Set…” http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/10/23itunes.html
10. Raymond Shih Ray Ku, 2001, “The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics od Digital Technology”, University of Chicago Law Review.
11. Jeevan Jaisingh, 2004, “Piracy on file sharing networks: Stratergies for recording companies”, Hong Kong University of Science & Technology.
12. Wired Magazine, 12.18.2007, “David Byrne and Thom Yorke on the Real Value of Music”, http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_yorke?currentPage=all#ixzz0jlXr4Ley
In 2007 Radiohead, a popular musical act released their seventh studio album, In Rainbows in a way not seen before from such a well known musical, act: They made their album available to download, at a cost decided by the consumer, from the bands website—as well as making a hard copy available to be purchased by fans in conventional music stores1. It was big music conceding defeat in the digital distribution war.
The distribution of media through piracy, even p2p is not a new phenomenon. Video piracy was widespread with the consumer availability of VHS recorders, software piracy plagued developers since programming shifted from hard-coded chips to the floppy disk, and music piracy was no different2. With technological advances come new methods of breaking the law, it must follow then that legislation needs to keep up-to-date with emerging technological trends.
Digital distribution of music was not a new concept for the music industry3 in 2007, the time this white surrender flag was waved. By 2007 the case of Napster was long in the past and Apple’s iTunes store was now five years old. The music listening public had made their choice and it was up to the artists and record labels to catch up—people were not going to stop downloading music, (no matter what the cost?).
Not so much that’s it was the musicians themselves, as most of them shared their voice with the people in the battle cry for digital distribution, Acts as diverse as pop music’s Moby4 and Prince; New Metal band Slipknot; and the anti-establishment political rap group Public Enemy5 had been long advocates of digital distribution; In the case of Public Enemy, this stance put them up against their own label: Def Jam6. The record label, the face of the enemy.
Recording companies were the biggest opponents of digital distribution, primarily because it was seen to undermine their position in the music industry heavyweights, the generals and brigadiers leading their elite squads of musical acts in the pursuit of money and fame. The record companies saw digital distribution as synonymous with piracy and responded with legal actions against its proponents—both those end users downloading music, but also those that put in place the infrastructure to accomplish this.
Sony was one recording company that had tried, and failed horribly to counter digital distribution in 2005 with their DRM software7. People who had brought compact disks legitimately, were the casualties, a root-kit installed on a users computer once the CD was inserted into the optical drive, making the users computer vulnerable to malicious code. It was the wrong approach, for the kids of generation Y, downloading music was seen as a rebellion against an over-zealous corporate establishment8. Punishment for rebellion would only prove counter productive.
Apple, makers of designer electronics, had taken a different tact. Unlike Sony, Apple did not see digital distribution as a threat to their existing business model. Apple may not have had the massive back catalogue of music it owned rights to, but it did have dominance over the MP3 player market, so the choice to embrace digital distribution with its iTunes store could be seen as less of a risk. By October 2007, Apple had secured rights to distribute “digital” boxed sets from 1970’s super group Led Zeppelin9, people would still download music, even if they did have to pay for it.
Legislation was seen as something that needed to be brought into line with the emerging technologies, legislation that was fair to both user, creator and publisher. After the Napster case hit US courts, a “Digital Recording Act” was proposed10. Without a legal framework corporate interests would still look at digital distribution with an eye of mistrust, they needed a guarantee of return-of-investment on their stockpile of music11.
What the success of the Apple model of distribution, over Sony’s DRM failure taught musicians was that the old paradigm of selling music was becoming obsolete, and it followed that the record companies themselves were obsolete. Artists could do away with the corporate drill, and take on their own means of getting their music to their audience. Bands had taken on this endeavor before, as militant anti-government rap group Public Enemy had done. But popular music had yet to free itself from the corporate hierarchy—that was until an internationally known pop band Radiohead released “In Rainbows”, in its first month online over a million copies were downloaded taking US$3 million, from 40% of those users choosing to pay. At an average of $6(US)12, proving digital distribution can still be lucrative for the artist.
What the significance of In Rainbows had to the digital distribution of media was not a technological one, but a larger cultural paradigm shift. Indy bands, and militant rappers had embraced the technology before, but this was confined to smaller sub-cultures. The mass adoption of digital distribution had been proven effective, and it wasn’t until In Rainbows was this acknowledged by anyone from within the corporate music mainstream. This act meant not that the battle lines had been redrawn, but that the war was finally over.
References
1. Wikipedia, “In Rainbows” en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Rainbows
2. Kembrew McLeod, 2005, “MP3s Are Killing Home Taping: The Rise of Internet Distribution and Its Challenge to the Major Label Music Monopoly”
3. Sean Ebare, 2004, “Digital music and subculture: Sharing files sharing styles”
4. Moby, “Napster” 2001 www.moby.com/journal/2001-01-29/napster.html
5. John Borland, 2000, “Rapper Chuck-D throws his weight behind Napster” news.cnet.com/2100-1023-239917.html
6. MTV News, 2000 “Public Enemy Leaves Def Jam, Will Distribute Next Album Online” www.mtv.com/news/articles/1427080/19990114/chuck_d.jhtml
7. Molly Wood, 2005, Cnet News, “DRM This!” www.cnet.com/4520-6033_1-6376177-1.html
8. Carrie James, 2009 “Young People, Ethics and Digital Media”, Page 53, MIT Press
9. Apple Co, (Press Release) 28th October 2007, “Led Zeppelin Digital Box Set…” http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2007/10/23itunes.html
10. Raymond Shih Ray Ku, 2001, “The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics od Digital Technology”, University of Chicago Law Review.
11. Jeevan Jaisingh, 2004, “Piracy on file sharing networks: Stratergies for recording companies”, Hong Kong University of Science & Technology.
12. Wired Magazine, 12.18.2007, “David Byrne and Thom Yorke on the Real Value of Music”, http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_yorke?currentPage=all#ixzz0jlXr4Ley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)