Listening to: Pink bullets - The Shins

Interactive audiences? - Henry Jenkins

Q Do the new possibilities offered by media such as the Internet give its consumers more freedom or is this simply an illusion?

A We're dealing here with a subject extensively covered by Fiske and Adorno. Adorno claims that media consumers are always going to be dominated by the media. He sees it as impossible to escape the grip and influence the media have on our lives and actions. Fiske is less pessimistic. He acknowledges the influence or power the media can have over its consumers but at the same time gives them a voice. According to Fiske media consumers take elements of the culture imposed on them by those same media and use those elements to create their own reality. I'm going to have to agree with Fiske. I refuse to believe that we are simply little sheep following the media sheppard.
Have technologies developed in recent years given us more freedom, though? Perhaps it feels like that. We are able to find virtually any information at the touch of a buttom. Unfortunately the Internet and similar technologies have also greatly speeded up our way of life. To be part of society people have to be on top of things 24/7. In a way this imprisons us.
At the same time society is structured in a way that makes us extremely reliant on (electronic) technologies. Should all of that fail society as we know it would crumble to dust.


The following is not so much a critical question as more a criticism on Jenkins. On page 2 he summerizes Levy: [He] explores how the 'deterritorialization' of knowledge, brought about by the ability of the net and the web to facilitate rapid many-to-many communication, might enable broader participation in decision-making, new modes of citizenship and community, and the reciprocal exchange of information.
The point they fail to see is that eventhough millions of people are connected via the internet, at the same time millions of people aren't. More and more people are divided not only through race, sex or geography but also through connectivity. I find it rather naive to state that everyone can be a part of the global network that Jenkins and Levy speak of. Senior citizens, women, the unemployed, Third World countries; all of these have difficulty being part of the 'system'.


Q Jenkins speaks very highly of the fact that it's becoming more and more possible for audiences to influence the programs they watch. Is this influence a good thing?

A Obviously for a fan it is great to be involved in the shaping of the show you love. However there is also something to be said for the creativity of the artist. Shouldn't art - and by art I mean not just high Art but also popular culture - be about 'what the public needs' instead of 'what the public wants'? If everything is going to be decided for by the general public every television program, magazine or book will be an average of different opinions. That way we run the risk of creating a world in which everything is a neat average. The things the public needs can't be determined by the public itself but should be up to the producers and artist to figure out.
It should be noted however that said producers and artist should work from a commercial starting point but rather adopt an artistic attitude for this to succeed.