What will the media look like? As Vivian (2009) notes, new technologies have always shaped and driven social media channels. With the advent of the public Internet, according to Vivian, consumers began to explore in the early 1990s. Companies around the world have been in a frenzy of beating competitors to the Web to uncover new forms of content. >. Perhaps nowhere is this struggle to reduce value and purpose more prominent than in the media industry. The recent surge of cheap, widespread digital technologies into mainstream use has allowed consumers to take media into their own hands (Vivian, 2009). As Pascu, Osimo, Ulbrich, Turlea and Burgelman (2007) note, these technologies “have the ability and power to disrupt existing social and economic relations and thus have a greater impact on society” (1). In fact, today’s mass media companies are more concerned with the audience, who want something new or different. With the widespread adoption and involvement of technologies such as wikis, Twitter, RSS and DRM, social and financial media companies are now facing social and economic pressures to promote mainstream digital solutions one step in front of their audience, before the audience creates something new or different for themselves.
Wiki: working together
One of the first authors along the lines of user-as-producer Web thinking, the wiki is a collaborative online technology environment designed “to arm collective intelligence” (20), according to Pascu, et al (2007). A wiki is a website that allows its users to create and edit content on the website (Bhuiyan, 2006). As Bhuiyan asserts, “a wiki supports hyperlinks and has a simple text syntax for creating new pages and crosslinks between internal pages on the fly” (19). Despite the occasional criticism about the susceptibility of the user to wrong, consuming ardor of wiki technology is best demonstrated by the popular, public (and free) website called Wikipedia, which recently boasted over 4,600,000 articles in over 200 languages, according to Bhuiyan. According to Tapscott and Williams (2006), social media sites present opportunities to tap into the collective consciousness of the audience, the interests of public knowledge, and to work collaboratively across geographic boundaries to coordinate centrally. For example: the book Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything, in itself, from such collaboration (Tapscott and Williams, 2006).
Twitter: one is many
In the wake of the large adoption rates surrounding blog (or web log) technology, several providers have brought in microblogging offerings, as epitomized by Twitter. A microblog serves the same purpose as a blog: to distribute content entries, express opinions and opinions, share information and links, and distribute news or commentary, according to Bhuiyan (2006). The distinguishing aspect of microblogging sites lies in the microlog factor; Twitter entries, for example, are limited to 140 characters. In many cases, 140 characters are just enough for a web page link and teaser to entice followers to click. The inherent boundary character of microblogging can be, at times, an advantage or a disadvantage – some struggle to adapt to a restricted language while others enjoy the brevity of the shared bond. As Pascu, et al (2007) note, such technology has enjoyed increased use as a content distribution channel, both within the media industry and among other professions. Twitter users can quickly and easily build a composite following of thousands of people and, with the click of a button, send out direct updates to inspire those followers to take action. Therefore, Twitter has become a tool valued by many media and marketing professionals. Because of its widespread adoption and effectiveness, Twitter surpassed the $1 billion mark in brand value and gained the attention of the technology giant conglomerate as a potential acquisition (Mermigas, 2009).
RSS: Many to One
Often combined with Twitter, RSS (Really Simple Syndication) allows users to subscribe to desired content feeds and set up personal aggregators that compile information of interest from sources selected by users (Tapscott and Williams, 2006). By subscribing to a website via RSS, users receive real-time updates, usually via email notifications, to highlight new, posted content. With this ability, according to Pascu, et al (2007), “every user can build his own newspaper” (25). RSS has become a common companion to many forms of digital media technology, allowing users to blog, microblog, web media sites, discussion forums and more. In general, the communications industry has incorporated the capabilities of RSS in designing user-friendly, accessible online information delivered directly to consumers through their preferred distribution channels. This method of content distribution represents an advantage for both consumers and media companies. Consumers can abandon the habit of browsing the Internet for new information, and media companies can effortlessly deliver new content to audience members’ inboxes. However, RSS presents the risk of an issue that is present in all methods of instant distribution: because it feeds updates when it first sends out new content, erroneous content can easily reach thousands of subscribers before the errors are detected.
DRM: Imposing limitations
The tension between the dissolved consequences of digital technology arose in the introduction of DRM, or Digital Rights Management (McGuigan , 2010). DRM exists to impose restrictions on the free-for-all copying and editing of content that lies at the heart of many user-generated resources. Many forms of media, according to McGuigan, incorporate DRM measures “to restrict the free use and transfer of digital content” (1). McGuigan notes that DRM techniques include coding and encryption of data to restrict access to media to authorized users, usually those who have granted access. Restrictions could limit the number of times users could access content or the number of devices on which content can be accessed, McGuigan states. While the media industry has embraced DRM as a last ditch effort against consumers‘ entitlement mentality and breaking boundaries. fair use and copyright infringement, which measures are widely disliked in the literature and have received heavy criticism in light of changing trends in content usage.
Overall, these technologies, along with many others, continue to drive home the brilliance of the traditional media industry at risk. As Pascu, et al (2007) and Vivian (2009) point out, because digital technologies allow users to produce, disseminate and share content with little work or technological know-how, the social communication industry has lost its corner in the information distribution arena to more consumers. According to Pascu, et al, such technologies have allowed user-generated content to become a heavyweight contender against traditional, established staples of mass media, such as the earlier encyclopedia. After all, as one special report found a few years ago, the user-generated and user-edited Wikipedia proved comparable to the old and long-running Encyclopedia Britannica in terms of information accuracy (Aegidius, 2005).
The threat of digital technology to media companies is almost self-explanatory in light of such evidence of the public’s ability to produce and share content at no cost that is comparable to the information previously provided by professional writers and publishers. Media outlets that used to be the “voice of the people” are now finding their content offerings increasing levels of cannibalization at the hands of their audience members. While savvy companies are using the same digital technologies available to their audiences, the media industry’s reactive rather than proactive approach is now dictated by consumer trends and marketing standards. As a result, the continuation of social media on its traditional basis has been orchestrated by the very consumers who built it in the first place.
References
Bhuiyan, S. (2006). The impact of new media technology on society. AsiaMedia Archives. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=52164
McGuigan, B. (2010). What is DRM? wiseGEEK. Retrieved February 21, 2010, from http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-drm.htm
Mermigas, D. (2009). Social media is the new means of social communication. MediaPost. Retrieved February 21, 2010, from http://www.mediapost.com/publications/?fa=Articles.showArticle&art;_aid=119013
Pascu, C., Auximi, D., Ulbrich, M., Turlea, G., & Burgelman, J.C. (2007, March). The potential disruptive impact of Internet2-based technologies. First Monday [Online], 12 (3).
Aegidius, J. (2005, December). We go head to head in the Internet encyclopedia. Nature, (438), CM.
Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. (2006). Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Is Changing Everything. New York: Penguin Group.
Vivian, J. (2009). In Mass Media Communication (9th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon
