This article argues that the younger generation has wrongly  been dubbed the Internet generation, as this is more of a transitional stage. The reason why this generation has been labeled the Internet generation is ostensibly because it is the fist generation to have always had the Internet as a communication tool available to them. Herring believes that this is a transitional stage because the decision makers are, or at least are portrayed as less Internet savvy than the millennials. They did not grow up in a world with Internet and so this affects the way they view the millennials. In a sense, the adults create the world around the millennials and in a way this is as a good thing, as adults have always attempted to work in children’s best interests, to do what is good for them, but as the article mentions, the millennials, despite being the least aggressive and violent generation in living memory, are tarred with the brush of the games and movies that are produced for them and which they play. Of course, the mass shooting that take place mostly in the USA cannot be ignored, but this does not mean that as a whole, the generation is more violent because of the games that they play. There is a difference between creeping through a swamp, with a sniper rifle, waiting to blow someones head off in a video game, and actually doing it.

Everyone manipulates their identity in accordance with the social discourse which they carry within them, which enforces tact and politeness, and a certain way of dressing. While these social nicety rules may not always be adhered to, the decisions that are made are all affected by them, whether it is a rebellion against them, or not. Identity is a core concern of people everywhere and this is defined by being part of groups and having a sense of belonging.

However, the identity of the millennials begs an analysis, since their identity is not only constructed around them, but also, the people who analyse the identity of the millennials are the ones who are creating it. this means that their identity may well not be fixed. The behavior that is flouted around us, may just be an age factor rather than a significant change in human culture, and this will remain an unknown until the true Internet generation rises from the transitional millennials.

Discourse has been used in many ways by different types of researchers, and so it’s definition extends to not only what is said, who says it and where, but also how and why, and more specificallly  what influences it to be said. After all, words are meaningless without a social structure to frame them. The article shows that discourse is centred around a text, the discourse practice surrounding it consisting of the production and consumption of the text. This in turn is surrounded by sociocultural practice. What this means is that any analysis of a text must take into account the discourse that centres on it, but also must take into account the sociocultural setting that creates the discourse of the person or people who create and consume the text.

Of course, every discourse is different, and this is affected by the genre that the text is and what setting the text is written. The article mentions that ‘media texts are sensitive barometers of cultural change which manifest in their heterogeneity and contradictoriness the often tentative, unfinished and messy nature of change.’ This shows that media discourse can reflect more about culture than the text itself. For example, the way writing for newspapers was in the nineteen-seventies is much different to the writing that is now found in the newspapers today. This is seen in less sensationalist writing and seemingly more objective viewpoints. For example, a flu vaccination advertisement of the seventies insists that without the flu vaccination, you will get sick and it will be catastrophic, whereas in the public heath outbreak of Swine flu, the government has changed its discourse from alarmist propaganda to the  insistence on calm that is seen now.

There are public and private discourses, for example, the discourse formed by the audience of a television show is large and can form a template for private discourse. Private discourse is often conversational, and in recent years it has become more common to find public discourses imitating private discourses, especially in cooking, or lifestyle programs. As an example, Dr. Harry the vet conducts all of his shows in a very conversational manner, but is undeniably a public discourse for broadcast. In this, the producers attempt to place the audience in an environment which they are comfortable in.

To sum up, the notion of discourse is wide and always changing and while studies may conventionalise both private and public discourse, the scope of its ever-changing nature makes this near impossible.

Blame and action need not always be straight forward. The way sentences are constructed can have a great impact on the way an ostensibly objective report is viewed. It is mentioned in the article that through the analysis of the most widely circulated paper (the Sun) in Britain from the dates10/11/1986 to 3/1/1987, certain trends appear, especially in newspaper reports dealing with rape. The phrase ‘stuff happens’ is brought to mind while any study of language in reporting takes place, with the further analysis of what makes the ‘stuff’ happen. The ‘stuff happens’ comment was mentioned in relation to the recent war in Iraq, however it  also holds true in other forms of reporting.

The tone of a sentence is determined by the ‘voice’ with which it is written. Active voice strongly places all of the ‘blame’ for the action on whomever performed it, while passive voice, mentioning the perpetrator, de-emphasises it’s role in the action. Middle voice is what is used in the phrase ‘stuff happens’. The perpetrator of the happening is not specified, and this leads to a sub-conscious assumption that stuff happens by itself – nothing causes it to happen, and this can happen greatly in ‘objective reporting’ especially that dealing with war and other violent crimes.

This article is specifically dealing with the crime of rape and its portrayal through word choice and sentence structure. As shown through the examples given, ‘fiends’ and ‘monsters’,  attack unavailable women, which is shown through the choice of description of wives, mothers, loving daughters etc. Men who commit these same crimes without being labeled as inhuman, attack ‘availiable’ women, shown by the fact that they are blonde, divorcees or prostitutes.

This links to the complaint that men view women as either saints or prostitutes, and this view is perpetuated through media. The language of the analysed time was far more obviously sensationalised than modern reporting, which aims to be very objective and remove bias, however under analysis, this is not the case. Middle voice is still used to imply that crimes just happen, that they are unavoidable and excuses are still built into the naming of victims and perpetrators. Careful observation will show that the crimes described in the most gritty manner will be perpetrated by inhuman monsters rather than the quite understandable attacking of available women. The mere demonising of the woman ‘clare’ who spoke up about the NRL football sex scandal goes to show this. Doubt is built into paragraphs in order to make the reader doubt not only the validity of her claims but also her personal character. It is far past time that the victim stops being blamed for crimes not committed by them.

The founder of seimology, while presenting a cohesive argument and theory overlooked unintentional signs and assumed that the the role of the sender of the sign was an important one. Also, there is no real difference between what he labeled as the signifier and the signified. The theory evolved to address these issues by expanding the meaning of signs to include whatever means something -anything- to somebody. However, another problem was detected – that of change. If meaning is relational and can change depending on the viewer, then it is wrong to assume that the system used for understanding how meaning is created is static. It was argued that meaning could not be exactly reproduced.

Since meanings are so able to be manipulated, this has political and social consequences.With the choice of words comes a choice of interpretations. The article provides the example of the European ‘invasion’ / ‘settlement’ of Australia, and the associated ‘occupation and disinheritance of the culture of the Aboriginal people’ / ‘burden of care of the Aboriginal savages’. These both are two viewpoint that are in some ways accurate, but the choice of words portrays a very different picture in each of them. In one the British are the invaders, taking land, culture and people away from where they belong. In the other, they are seen as kindly conquerors, taking care of the ‘savages’. As seen in this example, words can be twisted to manipulate meaning to transfer blame.

In the here and now, meanings are used to sell products, win voters etc. and it is imperative that all meanings are recognised.

Audience research has changed greatly with the obvious changes in audience. With conventional forms of media, such as television, radio and newspapers, audiences were passive. The experience of reading or viewing occurred, and extended no further. With the availability of interactive forms of media like the Internet, a phenomena of produceage has become more widespread. In Couldry (2005), an example is provided of an advertisement which offered shares in a film production in return for becoming an extra in the film. This example shows that there has been a power shift from the producers to the audience and it is this power shift which will be discussed.

This power shift has been triggered mainly by the diffusion of audience. This diffused audience no longer relates most closely to its locality, but rather to a global community. The diffused audience has it’s permanent umbilical cord to technology, where technology has permeated every aspect of modern life, from socialisation to work to entertainment. This audience is different to previous audiences, which were generally either simple or mass. Simple audiences could be found through theatre or literature prior to the “media age”, while mass audiences would be found through radio, film, television and newspapers throughout the late nineteen and the twentieth centuries. From this point onwards, audiences have muted into the diffused audience. In the life experiences of the diffused audience, media is no longer a “mass” experience, such as a cinema viewing or even television and radio broadcasts, as the media available is able to be fully customised. The emphasis is now less on the experience of community through common media, and more focused on the experience of individuality through customisation.

However, while diffused audiences celebrate customisation, they are inundated with media from every facet of life. Some examples include televised signs, mobile phones and newspapers. This means that the media is almost impossible to escape without becoming a hermit. Where the media is so diffused, it is logical to draw the conclusion that the audience is also diffused. The implications this has for audience research involve studying not just the direct interactions between people and media, and not only merely observing the direct media consumption of subjects, but instead studying the culture as a whole, in the context of media.

Power shifts occur whenever balances change, and in the media culture that is commonplace in many countries, suddenly, no longer are producers divided from audiences by a specific set of criteria. Instead, audiences now create via Youtube and blogs, a role that previously had been very specific to producers. This homogenisation is still taking place, disorientating many institutions set up for profit from production, who are experiencing a backlash against their perceived power.

Calling today’s age an “information age” or “knowledge age” is somewhat of a fallacy, as this is not the only age in which there has been transfer of information. From homing pigeons to books and the tombs of the rich, there has always been a transfer of information from one person to another. Knowledge and information is power and productivity. To emphasise the knowledge we now posses as somehow being better or more complete than the knowledge we possessed in earlier ages would be arrogant and so Castells attempts to relabel this era as a network society, with the following criteria: Network societies are primarily characterised by their scalability, flexibility and survivability. As an example, the Internet. From its very beginnings to where it is now spanning the world,  connecting every place in some way instantaneously,it fulfils each of these criteria. It can change as needs, can be as large or small as necessary and  the Internet as a virtual structure will not fail if one node does. The Internets only vulnerability is in the mechanism by which it is connected, rather than the network itself.

This network society has created great change in the practices and concepts that were used to govern life during the industrial age, for example. The concept of “clock time” and the functioning of a highly routinised and structured life became commonplace at the beginning of the industrial age.The network society has altered the relationship between time and space, so that time becomes less important as a consideration in life. There then becomes two spaces, coexisting intertwined: the space of places and the space of flows. These can blur together at times, leading to a “doubling of place” where consciousness can exist in both the place and flow of a space. The space of flows is accessed through technology, and while communities and people can value the space of places, emphasising locality and experience over the spatial form of the network, whose logic can be transitory.

Castell’s hypothesis is that: “the culture of thew network society is a culture of protocols of communication between all cultures of the world, developed on the basis of common belief in the power of networking and … giving to others and receiving from others.” He supports this with the example of hackers and their ethical code, which consists of two components: a want to innovate for purposes other than for capital gain and with this, a want to share this instant gratification. Instead of “trade secrets”, in the network society knowledge is pooled, allowing further innovation and as innovation is the source of power and wealth, this then becomes the culture of the society, with an acceptance of the knowledge others have, and a grater appreciation of diversity.

Media involvement does not necessarily require a set ‘audience’-'performer’ relationship, as evidenced by phone and Internet communication. However, this can be easily forgotten in our studies of media which focus on the more static relationships within television, news and radio consumption.

The excerpt from Moores (2004) discusses both sets of technologies and how we relate to them. The sense of ‘doubling of place’ in it’s most literal form can be seen in strict ‘audience’-'performer’ roles. This doubling occurs when an audience views information presented in a way that implies immediacy. For example, contestants on a game show appear to play live through camera work and careful stage-managing, but the show is made long before it is broadcast and this creates a sense for the audience of being in more than one place at the same time. It can also lead a viewer to feel emotionally connected to someone they have never met and so in this way, the audience is not only time shifted, but also displaced from their usual settings and made to feel present in the company of people they may never have met. This emotional connection is what leads society to feel collectively about certain issues, which may even interrupt their daily routine, such as in the case of a famous public figure’s death.

Of course, the situation can become more complicated when the two realities – that of the audience and that of the performer collide, as can happen with the internet and telephone more so than with more static technologies. The excerpt mentions an anecdote about a young woman holding a ‘private’ conversation while in a public space. Her audience in this public domain assisted her in this, turning away so as to appear disinterested, and yet one audience member refused to comply with this unspoken social construct, and so while in her ’private’ conversation, she was the audience, she became more aware that she was a performer. 

Media not only contributes to societal rules and routines, but also to a sense of time and place. However, if subjective and objective place collide, it can cause a jarring effect. Ultimately, we must always consider that the times and places that are subjectively experienced through media usage are merely human constructs, and yet this subjective experience can be more powerful than an objective observation.

Media broadcasts are a daily occurrence and as such, they ground us. When a television channel can be switched on to regular programming, clocks become rather obsolete. Certain programming combinations are on each day at the same times, to cater to the audiences who are more likely to watch them. These generalisations are deeply ingrained in our society. For example; the six o’clock news is designed for nine-to-five workers, afternoon programming is more often than not, targeted at the stay at home mother or wife and children’s programming dominates the after school spot.

This grounding mainly affects perception of time, as well as the sense of human interconnectedness. Media becomes a part of daily lives through domestication, and as a part of integration builds human behaviour into routine. Since television programming, newspapers and magazines have different audiences, their news cycle is also affected. Magazines may have anywhere from a weekly to a quarterly news cycle, newspapers generally have a twenty-four hour cycle and television can reach out with all the immediacy of a situation, and this is becuase of the demands of the viewers. John Harlty makes mention of frequencies, which are involved in subjective experience of time. These frequencies are labelled within the cycle of creation, circulation and consumption. In most of his writing however, it is the frequency of circulation which is discussed most.

Wavelength in Media works in the same way as in the physical world. The formula, frequency multiplied by wavelength equals a constant still holds true in that whenever the frequency goes up, the wavelength goes down. Media can be ranged along a scale from low to high frequency with todays paper being high frequency, reaching less people (wavelength) with more immediacy than for example, cave paintings – which have an extremely low frequency, and yet they are known about all over the world.

As culture has accepted technology more and more closely into daily routines, the frequencies of new media have become faster and faster. From cave-paintings, to bas-relief and carvings, hand scribed books and letters, the printing press, radio, television and the internet, news can now be merely seconds in the creation. High frequency includes any publication with a frequency less than a week, anywhere between this and a year is described as midrange. Anything longer is low frequency and as society has slid up the scale towards high frequency, with “shocking” releases of news before the event, and a constant stream of information, so lives and routines have changed to match this due to a change in subjective experiencing of time.

A concept goes through many stages in its lifetime. It begins as something magical to be revered, it then becomes “the next big thing” and eventually works its way inextricably into our culture and social interactions. Of course, not all concepts live forever, or stay in use, but all stay in our cultural consciousness. Media studies in different eras has focused on different stages in the life of a concept. Technological determinism states that it is not only the role of the consumer to marvel at technologies but also to demand bigger (or smaller), better, faster, and simply more in the way of invention. This view assumes that humans use tools, machines and concepts without fundamental change to themselves or their social order.

Domestication sprung from the ashes of determinism, as constructivism took hold within the study of media. Domestication is the process of taking technologies and introducing them into the places in society where they change the fundamental structure of society while being completely taken for granted. As domestication takes place, and tames technology, people become used to the idea of having the technology and so find more uses to rely on it for. As an example, when computers were first released, there was no real function for them, and yet we welcomed them in their myriad forms into our homes, not really for functional purposes but so as not to be “left behind”.

And this is what is happening in so many forms around our homes today, with the television and the mobile phone. Domestication of the media is not only about having the latest technology but also the latest version of it, and this is what makes it different from the usual definition of the term. In the past, we have domesticated cows, horses, wolves, cats and pigs. In this process we have selected the most desirable features (different types of dogs, the disappearance of tusks from pigs, and horns from sheep as a prime example) and in doing so, have changed the very nature and temperament of the animal. This is what we attempt to do with media. We bring it into our homes in much the same process, but while once domesticated, animals remain much the same, only perhaps slightly improving wool quality (for example), media is constantly changing in form and in the types of information that it brings into the home.

And this has been happening since the beginning of invention, from the wheel to the sundial and to more modern technologies such as the mobile and television.

Signing off!

Media has always been a tool for communication. In older forms of media (such as television, newspapers and books) the direct communication is one way. These forms have the potential to spark debate and further communication within small groups or communities of people, which increases their connectedness with each other and the wider world. Later forms such as the Internet have the potential to create a global network, stretching across the planet. But, it must be asked, is this a case of quantity over quality? As a group, we love to communicate, interact and connect. We like feeling that we are a part of something bigger – a part of the town, a patriotic member of our country, a citizen of the world, and this is why we integrate media rituals into our lives. As Couldry (2003) states; “Formalised action… implies that ‘ritual’ involves a recognisable pattern, form or shape which gives meaning to that action. To see ‘ritual’… as action involving broad, even transcendent values – is compatible (with formalised action)”

These transcendent values are this feeling of interconnectedness, which we immerse ourselves in on a daily basis, whether it be music, books, television, the Internet, or any other form. This immersion allows social order to function. The mere writing down of rules (a classic example is the ten commandments) imposes a social normality into our way of thinking. Media influences us in many ways, even in non-conscious ones. By becoming aware of something, we have an opportunity to form an opinion on it, whether that be politics, the very nature of social cohesiveness, or whether or not to have MacDonald’s for lunch. Without information we cannot make decisions, and the media is how we obtain this information. Of course, media, while playing a large part in the continuation of societal order, must not be mistaken for a representation of the social whole. Our thirst for information allows social order to maintain itself.

The media process has always been viewed in many different lights - some positive and some negative.  On the one hand media has brought us closer together and given us more of a sense of interconnectedness, while at the same time it has forced us apart, into more superficial relationships with individuals. As an information medium, as a regulator of societal order, or simply as a part of our life, a rejection of media is a rejection of the interconnectedness of communities as a whole, and thus, regardless of differing opinions on the subject, media is here to stay.