I'm just your run of the mill college student looking to better the world we live in.... or just survive. I can't decide which.
Monday, December 14, 2009
I realize this is a bit late due to some personal disturbances over the past 5 days... better late than never I say.
Reflection: Looking back on my survey and comparing responses to what I sort of predicted that they would be, I found myself a bit surprised. Overall, when it came to overall knowledge about copyright laws and pirating, the responses given showed that, in the 14 people who took my survey, most had little understanding of the subjects aside from a general idea. This was not too surprising. It was in the other questions where my prediction was off. What conflicted the most was the fact that more people use illegal peer-to-peer methods of music sharing than I had thought and, that out of the people surveyed, most of them figured it should be illegal to download music and share it. So, people still use certain methods for the best turnout of success in making themselves happy even if the methods are illegal and should be treated as such. Reflecting on the final itself, I found out much more that I had previously known about copyrighting and, in essence, changed my opinion of copyrighting altogether. I initially was against it and figured it hindered musical development and sharing of ideas, but it actually promotes them in a more organized and "everybody is happy" way.
Second Life to me is a place where many can go to relax and get away from the somewhat harshness that is the reality they live in. It allows those to experience and explore a virtual world with nearly unlimited possibilities (depending on how much you choose to pay). One is able to fly, for example, in this game - flying is often one of the answers that people choose when asked if they had 3 wishes - and this game allows them to pseudo-pursue their wishes unhindered by gravity. Second Life literally is another life in which people are able to be themselves or be someone completely different online. Having a dual persona between real life and virtual life seems to be more and more commonplace as time goes on.
For my academic article summaries, I have decided to make a few changes which hopefully will improve upon my paper on the whole. First, I will add and develop to my introductory area of the paper. This way I can introduce my topics in a more clear and concise way. Secondly, I will add a conclusion to my paper. In it, I will tie in the focus of each article summarized and therefore better explain why I had chosen those topics to begin with. As no one has yet responded to my rough draft, I have just chosen these changes based on areas of paper repair discussed in classes and seen online. After doing this assignment, I have realized that peer criticism is a key factor in the finalization of any paper, especially one for academic reasons. Also, having multiple drafts and revisions rather than simply turning in an assignment after running through it once is a more effective way of ensuring that the points made were made clearly and thoroughly.
While deciding upon my research topic I chose to start some “scouting” in regards to musical creativity, copyright laws, and the effects they subsequently have on one another.I was somehow able to stumble across a few interesting articles which, incidentally enough, are usable for the summary assignment.Each article, while having similar subject matter, is specific to one aspect of musical creativity and design on the whole.
The first of the three articles relevant to my topic of choice comes from the American Music journal, Vol. 27 - Number 2 (2009).In the article ‘Only in America:
The Unique Status of Sound Recordings under U.S. Copyright Law and How It Threatens Our Audio Heritage,’ authored by Tim Brooks, there can be seen a review of and an overwhelmingly negative stance against United States copyright law.The article itself contains three main sub-ideas which help to back the claims Brooks makes.The first of which denotes a general history of copyright law on audio recordings in the United States for the past 120 years.He also presents his argument that the copyright laws of modern America have nearly barred access to historical recordings in the United States under common and state law. Brooks mentions that “laws have become so skewed toward the interests of present-day "rights holders" that…most of the recorded past has been locked up for generations to come—perhaps forever.”The second item Brooks chooses to focus on involves a representation of copyright law in a graph comparable to a modern business model and explains how, through a study, he found that there was a large demand for such music/audio from the past and that most recorded audio prior to World War 2 are owned by SonyBMG.The last few parts of this article discuss recent attempts to change copyright laws on historical media as well as ways to possibly ‘fight’ the laws in a peaceful and law-abiding manner.He concludes by reiteration of his key points as well as some personal insight into the possibility for change in copyright laws and describes an ideal situation where everyone in the United States can benefit from free access to all historical and present-day music/audio.
The next article I chose to take care explore was found in the International Review of Applied Economics, Vol.23 – Number 6 (2009) of all places.The article I found, ‘Economics and the ecology of creativity: evidence from the popular music industry,’ is written by Patrick Cohendet, David Grandadam and Laurent Simon.Although the title of the journal has an overall broad focus on economics, one of the major discussions of this article explains the creative development of music through a territory or interactions of three sub-groups – the Underground, the Middleground and the Upperground.The article takes a very economic approach by regarding the creative process of musical development as a marketable innovation and further expresses the idea that creative success in general is a difficult and varied process that cannot be achieved on a small, introverted scale.The article then breaks down the creative musical process through its individual descriptions of the Underground (i.e. the culture, individuals with ideas), the Middleground (others with similar ideas/approaches acting as a catalytic medium), and the Upperground (the “system” who turns music into a marketable career).Finally, the article concludes by giving examples of the creation and expansion of two influential genres of musical expression: Rap music in New York and Soul music in Detroit.The article then concludes with a recap of its overall idea that creativity is influenced by location and is generally a non-individualistic feat.
The final article I chose to read and discuss is found in the Journal of Business Research, Volume 62 – issue 10.Within the article ‘“To buy or to pirate”: The matrix of music consumers' acquisition-mode decision-making,’ authors James R. Coyle, Stephen J. Gould, Pola Gupta and Reetika Gupta explore the underlying factors to why some music fans contemplate and are eventually driven to pirating music rather than purchasing it legally.The article, arranged in an outline-esque format, discusses several factors including ethics, legality, economics, and consumer behavior, which have varying degrees of influence on pirating overall.The article also discusses a survey of 204 American business students created in order to gain a general understanding of how many students actually do pirate music (based on a rough definition of piracy); the results showed that roughly half of the students had committed piracy from 6 months previous and that half would pirate music again.Lastly, the article expresses some final information explaining that key factors in pirating music as no longer strictly ethical, but as a more complex and time or money saving process.
After viewing both video clips discussing technological and social media/information phenomena, I can say that I agree with both viewpoints of the speakers, Clay Shirky and Seth Godin.
Shirky's main motif of his speech revolved around the concept of the new "global, social, ubiquitous, and cheap" method of media transference and understanding as well as the shift from limited and repressed distributions of information to a more expedited and free dispersion of factual reality. Shirky's example of the Chinese media being beaten to the punch by Chinese citizens in regards to the Earthquake and the lack of proper safety protocol in school buildings was truly eye opening for me. The extreme quantities and delivery speeds of unrestricted, unregulated news via the public forced the hand of a system traditionally prone to regulation and restriction of any information deemed unfit for global scrutinizing. If censorship and control cannot be achieved, the only alternative is to cut off the source of the informational wildfire. Shirky's approach to delivering this information was to present his ideas in a more organized and semi-shock based style. He maintains audience connection through new truths and shifting ideas throughout many societies rather than a few.
Godin's speech was much more pop culture based and had a general air of traditional or historically revitalized presence. He uses humor to maintain a connection to his audience and many more eye-catching visual aides to re-establish the attention of those viewing - all while making a strong argument for his main point - the formation of "tribes" through technology and media. He argues that there is a trend shift from reclusive and independent thoughts among few to more universal and shared thoughts among many. People have a need to find others who share similar interests and technology as well as the Internet have provided a means for sharing ideas and finding one another.
Both speakers shared similar ideas in explaining how technology and media (especially through Internet-based tools) can be key catalysts in bringing about social and political change. Both men also focus on the idea that there is a seemingly inevitable shift of power from the traditional 'higher-ups' in society to the general public. In large enough numbers of a technologically oriented populous (Shirky) or groups of those who share similar ideas in "tribes" (Godin), there is great potential for change. Incidentally, both speakers were short on hair but great on knowledge and thinking outside of the box.
Some ideas that both speakers differed on involved the want for a social change in different groups of people and the want to lead and develop interest groups or tribes. Shirky focused more upon a general concept of a new wave of less controllable powers of an "e-independence" among many who wish to distribute information on an efficiently rapid scale whereas Godin expressed a supreme interest of those with similar viewpoints to create, lead, and effectively bring about social change in many different forms simply by having a group of people band together in whatever size or event.
After taking my screen shot, I can safely say that I'm a very social person when it comes to the internet. I'd even go as far to say I'm even more social online than in person - which isn't exactly a "fun" realization to say the least. I don't feel too distraught though. In all honesty, I think that we all tend to have slightly higher social tendencies when it comes to technology in general. The internet gives everyone, from the socially inept to the "its time to talk to a random stranger because I can" folks, a chance to connect with others in a less direct yet more convenient way. I tend to be a bit of a talker in real life, but when it comes to communication through technology, I have more time to collect my thoughts and have in depth conversations with people I may not normally see too often. Among just about all of the social and cultural groups that people associate themselves with, the one unifying factor that all of them seem to have is the usage of the internet and, more specifically, communicative websites programs, and technology such as Facebook, Internet Messengers, E-mail, Text Messaging, etc. It is odd to think that not even 15 years ago we were just starting to shrink cell phone size, make the internet more of a common factor in businesses and households, and we still had pagers... do we still? The point is, we as a society are constantly furthering our investment in technological integration and communications and, even at this seemingly advanced point in our progress, we are nowhere near the final stages of overall development. I can't wait for the future; the present needs to hurry up already.
And now for something completely different... well, not really but it's fun to say anyway.
Composing just about anything in digital space is commonplace lately. From news to dispersion of media in its many forms to the development and commentaries on new thought processes, compositions are shifting from seemingly archaic forms (i.e. newspapers, magazines, letters) to more novel approaches in digital space. You are given a much greater amount of control in customization through the use of advanced personalized tools, you are given a more expedited process of transferring many compositions through modern technologies, and making mistakes seems to be a thing of the past - at least, the ability to fix mistakes is a much simpler process than in the old-school styles of composition.
We are able to better understand the digital composing process the same way we are better able to understand how to ride a bike or tell a joke (an actual good joke, that is) - we try, try, and try again until we get it. Me and many of my peers are quite at ease with digital composition because we have been immersed in it for the better part of our lives. In contrast, many of those in older generations are still "getting the hang of it" so to speak are being forced to shift from their original dynamic to a more current dynamic to keep up with the societal needs of today. When there arises a paradigm shift in society, as it has been shown throughout history, we as a community always meet the challenge of that shift and inevitably create another shift which we will almost surely adapt to.
