Watch this space...

Well I've been too too slack here at Mediation Like A Fox the past few months, but that's about to change! I've finished my coursework now, so I'll have a lot more time to focus on this blog. I have a few new media opportunities popping up in the coming weeks/months, so hopefully I'll be inspired by some of the social media happenings I see around.

I've recently written an essay for uni about Mad Men, and also one about Google. If you haven't heard of Mad Men, how's life under the rock? If you haven't heard of Google, how are you reading this?

Over the next few days I'll be posting some of my musings on Mad Men's third season, inspired by my essay.  The Google one I also hope to adapt to a blog post, but I have to check out some things with it first, so that might take a bit longer.

I hope to get a few more readers, I'll be posting a lot more and be promoting the blog on Twitter and Facebook and things.

Bring on the summer!

wordpress templates

Here are some wp template directories I found handy: Free wp themes

Dzine Blog

And a CSS one: Free CSS templates

Although, editing the CSS of the one our group chose is getting tricky - I'm struggling to link to the front page and finding where the blog actually is...sigh.

Design, web narrative, and a little bit 'o post-structuralism

I quite enjoyed this week's readings, and especially found myself nodding along with Mark Bernstein's A List Apart article. I found myself agreeing wholeheartedly with his argument that narrative was an important ingredient in creating a working, interesting, engaging website. In a practical sense I really feel he has a point, although he did remind me of some of the theories of Roland Barthes, like the 'death of the author' and non-linear texts. Barthes' very influential post-structuralist ideas were expanded upon and applied to hypertext theory by George Landlow. He used them to describe how to read digital online, hyperlinked texts, arguing that it was a realisation of Barthes theories. The argument is that when a user browses the web, there is no set linear narrative, they can click on which ever link they like, a 'choose your own adventure' thing where there are many different outcomes. While this, in theory, seems to ring true about the Internet, I think Bernstein's article shows that there is a clear intention of web intent makers to give websites a 'story' - a beginning, middle and end. In most cases the story is used as a selling tool, in the realm of websites being marketplaces. Which we of course know they are. Like many Utopian visions of the Internet, the idea of free hypertextuality - where readers can roam freely without the constraint of traditional conventions - is a myth. Designers play with our eyes, enticing us to certain parts of the page, making some links easier to find or more attractive than others. I often find that with some websites I have trouble seeing where to 'log in' - its often hidden in a corner or perhaps on another page like through the 'are you interested.' It sometimes make me wonder of the creators really want participants to the site. Like active users would just create more work so they discourage it. But that could be me and my conspiracy theories again.

I wonder if this debate is really real, or just in my head. Is the Internet really a free network of links where we as users are free to roam where-ever our little hearts desire? Or are we subconsciously funneled onto certain parts so we can 'read the narrative' of a website and use its services or products the way the designer wants us to. Is Foucault's biopolitcal theory of mass-management based on probable statistics at work on the Internet, the seemingly last bastion of the free? Have I lost the plot? Where did I put my shoes?

How *not* to argue for the Internet

This week's topic for class was a lot more up my ally; talking about users of media, audiences and the way media actually works in the world. Being re-acquainted with the old Chris Anderson Long Tail article was good. Anderson presents a compelling and solid argument, saying that the future of the market will be less focused on mass assumptions of popular tastes and more on niche markets. He says this is mostly due to the emergence of the Internet and the world Wide Web as a highly dispersed, fragmented and collaborative marketplace. Henry (yes I'm going to bring him up every post, deal with it) Jenkins has drawn on Anderson's ideas in his book Convergence Culture to extrapolate on his arguments about consumers becoming more active: "The Long Tail model assumes an increasingly savvy media consumer..." While one could argue that there has still been a push but media producers to sell big, mass-focused, one-size-fits all brands (I'm thinking Apple, Harry Potter, Marvel) I think even conceding this one would have to agree that niche marketing is used to sell even these products. Apple likes to promote there being a version of its brand for everyone, and you can enjoy Harry Potter as a book, movie, audio-book, video game, website, lunch-box, etc. The other reading I was struck by (unfortunately not as positively) was the excerpt from The World Is Flat by Thomas L. Friedman. Where do I start? I have to say I noticed a similarity between Friedman and Richard Dawkins: in that they both have arguments I agree with in general, but I wince when confronted with the ideas because they sound like one of those crazy people with placards on the corner of Bourke Street. Coincidentally: Happy Birthday Mr Dawkins for yesterday. Anyway. Basically, Friedman loves the Internet. He wrote a love letter to it and its many founding fathers from about page 59 onwards in his book. That's great, I love the Internet too, and I believe (perhaps too ideally) that it has great democratising power. However, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that the Internet is a predominately Western, developed-world phenomenon, and that perhaps the idea of it bringing EVERYONE IN THE WORLD together might be a bit unrealistic. I mean, when you think about world poverty statistics, it puts things into perspective. So Friedman is not only a little off the mark when talking about a world shift in economics due to the Internet connecting us all, but its also a little bit offensively insular. Pankaj Ghemawat also wrote much more succinctly and intelligently than me about how Friedman is overstating the transformation occurring, pointing out: "just a fraction of what we consider globalization actually exists."

I would argue that there are many new media scholars (off the top of my head, looking to my bookshelf) like Jenkins, Lev Manovich, and Terry Flew, who all acknowledge the enormous cultural, political and economic power the Internet has as well as recognising the facts of an inequality to Internet access.

I'd be really interested in your ideas on this topic.

PS. I love Last.fm

Blogwatch - Go Fug Yourself

Today's edition of Blogwatch will be a simple one - I'm going to talk about one of my all-time favorite blogs from the US: Go Fug Yourself. For a little bit of background, here's the Wikipedia entry. You can buy their book spin-off (hello, horizontal marketing) here.

The 'Fug Girls,' Heather and Jessica, have found success, I think for two reasons. One is that they filled a niche. There are many celebrity gossip bloggers out there (most famously, Perez Hilton) but none who blog so consistently about one specific aspect of celebrity news, in this case fashion. The second reason is that they are hilarious and are providing a great online experience. In essence: the content is strong. The blog is simple and straight-forward - everything is where you'd expect it to be.

I think Go Fug Yourself is a perfect example to argue that online publications are really just like other traditional publications. Their success is based mostly on whether the product offers consumers anything different to what they already get, or just crap we're conditioned to believe we need, if you ask Chomsky.

Anyway, off to practice writing HTML, and work on the website idea (critique of FasterLouder.com.au, a competitor, coming soon)

Links - RedBubble

You find out about the Internet not just on the Internet but in 'real life' too. On Saturday I was at the pub having drinks with a friend for her birthday, and I started talking to one of her friends about what I did and what she did. Turns out she's a graphic designer, working on colour and materials at a major car company, but also produces her own art. When she found out I was into the Internet, she started talking about RedBubble - an online space designed as a community for artist and a wider galley space and business. Often it is the case that ebusinesses are able to promote products that perhaps are aimed outside the traditional typical consumer groups. The products sold can often be described as 'niche' pr perhaps even 'alternative.' Sites like Etsy.com for handmade crafts and Threadless.com (as mentioned in class) for custom t-shirts are good examples of this. RedBubble has that same idea of promoting emerging artists who perhaps have not yet broken into the more typical areas of exposure.

Taking a look at RedBubble and it becomes clear that its business is focused on a sense of community of both artists and art appreciators or customers. This is another big feature of many online retail stores, perhaps the most famous examples is the user reviews at Amazon.com or the buyer/seller peer reviews on eBay.com. I guess customers feel a bigger sense of autonomy and power as compared to a traditional store where interacting with like-minded customers is more difficult.

RedBubble was started in my home town, Melbourne, and now it has offices in San Fransisco and I think also now London. Perhaps its key to success is its focus on community, and also the fairly unique pitch of being an 'online gallery' where art lovers can browse and perhaps the works of artists from their homes. Social photo sites such as Flickr.com already serves the same sort of purpose, but RedBubble has the hook of having 'real artists' (whatever that means in this world of participatory media) uploading their work.