Monday, July 7, 2014

Fragmented Stability on New Media

Consider inputs into various new media artifacts. Is it the case that an input or set of inputs changes a new media artifact. Might one want this to be the case, for an input to create something greater than the whole.

Is this what one wants inputs to do. That is, I want this artifact on such and such a network because it gives this change to it. Well, one might ask, what is the nature of such a change if it happens. We can consider this as a) the time such a change may linger for and b) the extent to which the artifact becomes something new.

But consider a traditional media output. Do we expect it to change because of where it is. Well, perhaps to some extent, as a book takes on a life of its own (but note, of its 'own'). But new media ? Here stories are central these days, but this is perhaps to push the product into life on the Internet.

But if the product itself is a new media story of some kind. That is, if the product is something like a traditional media output. Well, if we consider such outputs to be creative one might assume that the strength of their life, makes them resistant to any change, and allows for a long lingering.

But if it is a creative act within and from new media, does it take on characteristics of a less stable life. That is, is the creative act of new media something different, with a different kind of life from other media outputs.

One does perhaps have this sense of intemporality of any new act. As in: where is that stability of life from creative traditional media. But perhaps one accepts this and asks what is the advantage now of this difference.

Let us consider the advantage is malleability, the possibility of molding it to different forms. And ask is this better. One might consider variety here, that each form has a functional life, as well as an artistic or creative life. But might consider that both are likely to be short (the nature of new media). But one might consider there is a way to get some stability of life in this media.

Where might it be ? It might be in a sense of logic, a life on the structure of the Internet. That is logical artifacts, not as artifacts representing logic or science, but simply logic of time, that is: what, with a short life can live long ?

So instead of going with some kind of disposability, from the fact that we can dispose with such ease and it seems to be nature of things on the internet, we go for permanence, nesting in such fragments of stability as exist on the Internet.

Perhaps such islands exist in the quality of each network. So instead of changing an artifact per se, the network stabilizes them and changes them thus, to, if one might put it like this, their form hidden within new media fragmentation.

Well, perhaps, but it may be that the nature of such artifacts is as we have suggested to be like this, fragmented and impermanent. Is it the case that all outputs are like this. One might suggest they are, in effect. But what is new is that it is now potentially possible to stabilize them in a naturalized way. That is, new media is a structure such that artifact can find stability, but this may be dependent on the artifacts themselves.

Wednesday, June 4, 2014

New Media, Social Media and Content

Can we consider new media to float in some way on social media. That is, given the possibility of direction from its life within social media.

Consider a new media artifact created and developed away from social media. Well, consider a new media artifact developed in an interest graph. Will such an artifact fit into social media. Social media consists of many possibilities of connectivity, an interest graph perhaps less, but with possibly firmer connectivity.

An interest graph can perhaps focus a new media artifact. A social media network can perhaps widen it. So at some stage perhaps both an interest graph and a social media network can play an enhancing and complementary role in new media content. So this gives an approach to a rationale from when to interact with an interest graph and when to interact with a social media network.

One thing about an interest graph is a level of personal anonymity, that is, it is more about the idea. However a social network can have these attributes as well. But always one might suggest a social element which can make for a number of enhancements in new media content.

But what about both. That is new media content nesting within a social network and an interest graph. Because a network can be both, we might consider here the idea of networks which are biased more towards social and ones which are biased more towards interest graphs.

We consider an adaptive new media content which can nest in such a way. Can we consider that something developed in this way is such content. Or can we bring something from elsewhere and induce it into this content. That is perhaps a key question in new media, what do you do with new media developed content and how do you bring other content into it.

The question about new media floating on social media is one of: what does one do with it. That is social media provides that which it may lack, a significant audience. But the wonder of new media is the idea of targeting.

We can see this as floating the content towards a friendly shore. But an interest graph may auto target, at least in terms of interest. The social media element is interest for a variety of other reasons. Can we consider some content is more suited to this.

Perhaps. So it comes down to part of the content is socially responsive and part of it is interest responsive. Does this give a way of looking at bringing content into new media. That is, molding it post creation to something socially and interest responsive. Does this imply that native new media content has some advantage in this ecosystem.

Well can we consider that non native content can be made to float in this ecosystem. That is, that no adjustments need be made to the content. So it is a question of the interface between the content and new media (the idea of flotation).

So what is that, well something that structures the content within new media. And what is this structuring, bearing in mind we do not want to change the content. Perhaps it is simply an issue of content sensitive targeting.

But this may require a certain variety on a theme, to be effective. Interestingly this is that idea of a kind of native new media theme development in new media, touched on in the last post. It may be that transposition of content may have issues at a structuring level.

However, it may be that non new media content is simply going to be influenced and structured by new media, and will thus float into its nest, as it were. This may or may not happen, but whether it happens is probably just a function of the nature of the ways culture and technology develop.

Tuesday, April 29, 2014

Creating an Effect in New Media

In a new media output, one can ask to the extent to which the output can or should be molded to an expectation of what one wants the effect of the output to be. Now, one can mold this to an idea of what the reader wants.

But one can ask whether new media outputs, in the sense of expression floating in a sea of other expressions, can adapt themselves to a range of possible outcomes, as of course really knowing who is reading it, or what the effect is, may not be entirely measurable. Indeed the idea by the reader that an effect is desired from a post, may even obviate that effect.

One can ask can there be utility in irregular updates, rather than regular updates. As long as there is a sense of the output being alive, then perhaps so. One does not expect a book every day. But then of course, are not new media expressions short, and thus need an output corresponding in some way to something like a book.

Perhaps not, even assuming this kind of continuity is possible. That is, one wants rather the power of expression, that is something to rise above the set of expressions. That is, one wants to control an enabling rather than an effect, if one can.

This again is the 'new', the effect of sets of statements, from the creation of these sets. It corresponds to a theme one may develop, and the addition and expansion of elements within that theme. While perhaps steering clear of theme development in the sense of a book.

It gives importance to each utterance, and indeed a reason not to automate this process. That is, each output needs human consideration, as well as creation.

It also brings such utterances closer to an idea of creative output. That is one may not envisage an effect, except perhaps in an artistic sense, from a creative novel or poem, one just, in its starkest sense, creates it, rather than engineering it.

But in new media one tends to be far from such outputs, but it may need something from this process, as the undecidability in knowing really what the effect may be needs that creative wing and a prayer. Also it is a wide open canvas, with something like the possibility of significant possibility.

And in new media is also the link with an effective functional use of words, that is, computer systems and the internet. One can ask does this actually affect the content of new media in any way. It may be possible to conjecture that it does, at least in the sense that the user interface and other constraints, constrain content. But does it constrain content in any other way.

That is, can creativity be brought to something that it seems to wish for, that is the world of effect and cause, and results (but which it may have had a difficult relationship with).

Can one see that logic structuring even if very loosely, disparate, irregular, but perhaps effective outputs.

Something like, snippets within snippets, beside snippets having an effect. To my mind, the cumulative effect of outputs is an effect, and it seems a strong one. It is contingent on variety and context, that is context within the set of statements, but not necessarily diminished or enhanced or even affected by the statements of others.

I might suggest that images also need this and can also create an effect like this. From consistency, a sense of a larger whole, perhaps a sense of growth or development, comes effect (this is the constraints used). This is perhaps why largeness in the world outside of a new media platform does not necessarily make for interest in outputs, per se.

So to mold statements to create an effect is perhaps to undermine their effect. But to mold statements for consistency, context is also perhaps to undermine an effect, just as it may be problematic to engineer growth. That is, the sense of development needs to be real. Which is why irregularity of updates is not necessarily a bad thing, in some circumstances.

It also points to the importance of content, around which everything else exists, and one might say, thrives, and indeed, will thrive. That is, enabling may make for a greater assurance of endurance, something that may be an issue in new media.

This is an issue of freedom, as enabling means also feeling free to create expression, and particularly in this medium, ones which are functional as well as creative. So potentially those who enable and continue to enable freedom and development within this freedom, enable a survivability in it.

One reason for survivability is that creative development takes time and may not be controllable. Thus what it is one is doing on new media, may need time.