PAST VS. PRESENT

A lot has happened since Henry Jenkins wrote his article ‘The Cultural Logic of Media Convergence’ (2004). He discusses the changing relationship between the producers and consumers of the media and poses many questions about the future of this relationship. According to Jenkins (2004), media convergence is the reason for this ever-changing communicative landscape. Instead of the traditional ‘we talk/you listen’ media model of old, ‘the people formally known as the audience’ (Jay Rosen) can now create and manipulate messages and release them into the world with effortless ease. This is just one aspect of media convergence that Jenkins covers. These days, media convergence is both a top-down corporate-driven process and a bottom-up consumer-driven process (Jenkins, H 2004).

In 2004, Jenkins discussed nine important negotiations he believed were apt to occur. I found it very interesting to read through his predictions of the future in comparison to the present. One that stood out for me was his stance on micro-payments in relation to online music sales. He nailed it. When he wrote this piece, micro-payment technology was still an idea being kicked around the office; now it has effectively killed the retail music industry. I would love to hear his current thoughts on what he wrote back then. For the most part, many of the issues of 2004 regarding media convergence are still considered issues today.

The revolutionary Apple II

Jonathan Zittrain’s article ‘The future of the internet and how to stop it’ (2008) also compared future and present. In this case, Zittrain (2008) discussed Steve Jobs’ release of the iPhone in 2007 compared to his release of the Apple II PC thirty years earlier. Both were revolutionary pieces of technology, but with different user capabilities in terms of content manipulation. The Apple II allowed its users to input and rewrite code in order to personalize the functions of the technology whereas the iPhone is the opposite. It is sterile. Rather than a platform that invites innovation, the iPhone comes pre-programmed (Zittrain, J 2008).

This difference in (for lack of a better word) permissions relates to Ted’s comparison of the iPhone and Android smartphone from the lecture (Mitew, T 2012). The Android, like the Apple II, allows outsider coding to change the capabilities of the phone. Mitew (2012) mentioned that they can even be programed to control other appliances and electronics around the house such as opening the garage door and changing the track on the CD player. I was unaware of these capabilities until now. Although extremely cool, are these ‘permissions’ worth the risk of viruses? I believe that most people are happy to sacrifice innovation for protection. I have never owned nor used an Android smartphone so I am hardly in a position to critically compare the two but I am willing to go out on a limb and say that the iPhone is the cautious person’s smartphone. I can only assume iPhone users generally don’t care about the coding; they just want their phone to work. I believe this is what Steve Jobs was getting at when he said:

“We define everything that is on the phone. . . . You don’t want your phone to be like a PC. The last thing you want is to have loaded three apps on your phone and then you go to make a call and it doesn’t work anymore…” (Zittrain, J 2008)

That's my two cents anyway. If you haven't already seen it, take a gander at the unveiling of the first iPhone (the intro anyway). I love how pumped everyone is in the crowd. Thanks for reading.

Peace.

References

Jenkins, Henry (2004), The cultural logic of media convergence, International Journal of Cultural Studies, Volume 7(1): 33–43.

Zittrain, J. (2008) "Introduction". In J. Zittrain The Future of The Internet And How To Stop It (p. 1-5)

Mitew, T 2012, Convergent Media Practices, lecture, BCM112, University of Wollongong, delivered 19 March.

Apple II pic sourced from: www.whatculture.com

Video sourced from: www.youtube.com