Are the media becoming more democratic?

Over the years there has been a major change in how media is consumed and distributed.  There have been many new types of media such as social and digital media. These new types of media have changed the way in which we consume media. Some say this is the reason for media becoming more democratic. The introduction of web 2.0 has made it easier for people to consume media, people can now upload videos and see videos for free and also having the choice to comment freely.

One way in which the media can be argued to have become more democratic is through the use of social media to organise and enable political protest. A recent example of this is the “Arab Spring” unrest across the Middle East in early 2011. In Syria for example, news of an individual protest in a small town was quickly carried via Facebook across the country, resulting in lots of copy cat protests, riots and eventually leading to a downfall. In the past, any such individual protests would have been prevented from appearing on Syrian state television, and therefore prevented from spreading. However, the rise for social networking meant that democratic forces such as the access to information and freedom of speech were given a place where they could flourish.

Furthermore another reason that media can be seen as more democratic is the rise in new technology. In the past technology wasn’t very good, in order to record something was very expensive as you needed equipment which was very expensive. This could only be bought by large institutions. However nowadays we have access to mobile phones and laptop. They contain features such as cameras and are able to record. This allows people to upload videos straight from their phones in a much easier and quicker way. Internet has also allowed the uploading process to be quicker. 3G internet allowed you to upload videos in minutes, before it would take much longer.

David Gauntlett says that in the past media was not democratic as they had power over censorship which enabled them to decide and pick what media they would show to the public. Newspaper and broadcasters are now known as the media gods as they now have power of the public. However now media is becoming more democratic because of web 2.0, before web 1.0 was introduced, and this was where only certain people could create media. The finding of web 2.0 such as Youtube, Twitter, and Blogger allows uploading videos in an easier way. However only 8% uploaded videos to YouTube. Citizen journalism can now be produced by web 2.0. Information can now be seen worldwide within seconds.  This was evidential in the Syrian protest. People recorded the protest on their mobile phones and then were uploaded to twitter for everyone to see. This shows that media is becoming more democratic as it is just as easy for people to share information compared to institutions.

However citizens can easily make up a story and upload to the internet, so it isn’t very reliable. Media such as YouTube has created a public sphere which allows people to comment on videos freely stating their own opinion and an also lead to debates. Clay Shirky says that social networking sites such as twitter and Facebook has created a platform to share information easily. An example of this is the Syrian protest where pictures were uploaded on twitter to show what was going on.

Evgeny Morozov says that the internet allows the government to track people on sites such as Twitter and Facebook. In the Syrian riots the government found out about what was being imploded to the internet and therefore cut the internet for a day.

Overall media is becoming more democratic as we now have greater choice. We can now upload videos and photos quickly which can be seen by most people.

Long Tail Theory

1. What is Chris Anderson’s theory of ‘the long tail’?
The long tail is a description of the way that the internet has transformed economics,commerce and consumption.  our culture and economy is increasingly shifting away from a focus on a relatively small number of "hits" (mainstream products and markets) at the head of the demand curve and toward a huge number of niches in the tail.

3. What is Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams’ theory of Wikinomics?

Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything is a book by Don Tapscott and Anthony D Williams, first published in December 2006. It explores how some companies in the early 21st century have used mass collaboration (also called peer production) and open-source technology, such as wikis, to be successful.According to Tapscott, Wikinomics is based on four ideas: Openness, Peering, Sharing, and Acting Globally.
1. Free Creativity (Openness and Sharing) - Making what you like and then broadcasting your creation globally with other users, e.g. YouTube
2. Peering - the free sharing of material on the internet
3. Acting Globally - Web 2.0 makes thinking globally inevitable, the internet makes communication of ideas simple.

Wikinomics is now making things more simple with more choice for example "iTunes" there is no factory with man-made product, it's all in the form of downloads. This is cutting out mass productions and distributions, making is easier for both the company and customer.

4. What are the five big ideas of Wikinomics and how might these ideas be applied to the music industry?

peering- the free sharingof material on the internet its good news for businesses when it cutts distribution cost to almost zero, but bad for those who wat to protect their creative materials protected  

David Gauntlett's ideas

According to Gauntlett, what was "the media" like in the past and what changes have now occurred?

In the past, media was very hard to consume as people weren’t given a choice to when they could consume it. These decisions where made by the media institutions not individuals. You can see that the media has a dominant role as people weren’t given a choice to how they consume media. Also in the past you needed big recording devices which were very expensive, and also you needed a big broadcasting company in order to distribute the media. This was very hard for people as they didn’t have sufficient amount of money in order to fund expensive equipment.

David gauntlet refers this as “The Media Gods” who distribute their media to “The little people”. However nowadays we can distribute media in a cheaper and easier way using things like laptops and mobile phones and uploading this to free websites such as YouTube where everyone can see. Here people upload videos about their life or whatever they want and everyone all over the world can access it. Media can now spread worldwide in a matter of seconds. YouTube, twitter and Wikipedia are new sources of information. Before the broadcaster would send out its messages however, now it’s different users.


2. How far do you agree with Gauntlett?
I agree with gauntlets ideas of new media as now people are not restricted in what type of media they can consume. People are freer to how they distribute and consume media. Websites such as YouTube, Twitter, Facebook and MySpace are big sources of media, where people can view and upload videos. This has created big competition of new media and traditional media. This all allows media to become more democratic.


3. How might Gauntlett's ideas be applied to the music industry?
In the past where Gauntlett came up with the idea of Web 1.0 where people created their own work, the music industry realised music through big record labels as this is the only way it could have been heard by the public. These record labels would then distribute the music through their media source. However with the development of web 2.0 more people are able to upload their videos in a much easier and quicker way. Sites such as YouTube allowed people to upload videos within minutes thus allowing the public all over the world to view it. These artists can then be discovered by record companies more easily.

Music industry in the online age.

How downloading has affected the music industry in the online age on Prezi