Are You Paying for Digital Freedom with Personal Privacy?

In my opinion, it would be seemingly ignorant to close our eyes to the attractiveness of one word, in particular: free. In a day and age where cost of living is rising and jobs in the media field are paying less, even journalists themselves are attracted to lower costs. The online medium of news coverage and media distribution is most often free, meaning users with access to internet can consume content without paying a cent. According to the article "Priced to Sell" by The New Yorker,"The cost of the building blocks of all electronic activity—storage, processing, and bandwidth—has fallen so far that it is now approaching zero." Therefore online resources have a competitive cost advantage in their ability to attract an audience. Yes, there are numerous individuals who enjoy holding a newspaper in their hand. But, in the future, these users may choose to forgo such a convenience in an attempt to save money. 

In the article by Wired, I was initially shocked by the "free" scenarios presented such as free movie and subway tickets. The new digital age has created an atmosphere of abundance where companies can use alternate (digital) resources to bring down costs. I do believe this will affect traditional media as it has affected the traditional model of economics. The historical view of economics was based on supply and demand, also known as scarcity. This can be compared to a newspaper, in which only certain topics and subjects can be covered. However, there is no limit on the Web as to the resources available. Similarly, online news sources have the ability to provide not only a cheaper, but also more complex, informative platform for users. 

While researching the evolution of digital media, I found this article about a media CEO who realizes the economic growth of the digital age. However, he has a unique perspective, in that he also realizes the grave dangers of delving into the digital society head-first. Check it out here: Evolve Media's President on the Future of Digital Media: Facebook Will "Own You".

Maybe E-Books are More E-Nooying Than We Thought?

I have yet to fancy into the whole Kindle or Google Books epidemic. Why? My main issue is the potential for distraction when using an electronic to read. Reading is a pastime that requires more cognitive thinking and concentration than most. It is not like a movie where the graphics or sounds jump out at you. There are no sound or scenery effects to set a certain scene. You, as the reader, are forced to insert yourself into the book by imagining a tale described by words. In order to do this, many people need to be in a silent, non-distracting environment where they can divulge as much meaning and context from each page of words. For this reason, I find E-books to be more difficult than convenient. While E-books allow me to open up a novel without bringing the physical, one or two-pound novel with me, I find it seemingly impossible to concentrate on the E-book screen. With the newest Apple software updates, I am constantly getting updates and notifications that pop up on my computer screen. While books do grab my interest, I am very tempted to click a notification that entails a text from a friend or an email from a potential employer. It is as if I have not escaped into the world of the novel, which is what the physical novel allows. Shockingly enough, there are credible sources that agree with me and see a similar future in the literature industry: Why Ebooks Will Never Be as Good as Real Books.

"Several years and a healthy does of cynicism later, it seems clear that these heady claims about e-books were suffused with the same millennial hopes and dreams that had helped fuel the late 1990s dot-com boom and its accompanying faith in a resplendent technofuture" (E-books and the Digital Future). Looking past the shiny screen of a seemingly-attractive piece of technology, one can begin to spot the benefits of sticking with a paperback book. In my opinion, there is something to holding a book in your hand. And the article I posted above agrees with me. When holding a novel in your hand, it acts as a centerpiece for discussion and allows those around you to know what exactly you are spending your time doing. If you are on your computer, that is sheerly impossible with the vast capabilities of the Web. It also tells a bit about you, or your interests. A novel adds character to your everyday individual. It is my fear, with the Web, we are taking away unique characteristics of ourselves by allowing technology to take over parts of our every day lives.

Digital Dynasty or Digital Devastation?

To what extent will the digital revolution take over? That is the question at hand in both articles, "Digital publishers face a winter of discontent" and "Business models of most-visited US social networking sites". The ability to use technology on a digital platform to acquire information, connect with other individuals, or create a personal profile, appeared to be what many considered the future. However, in the article published on Digiday, the author makes a claim that might make many second-guess the economy's dependence on digital media. One particular quote stuck out to me: "There’s that sense that not all of these digital news startups will see continuing hockey stick-like  growth,” said Ken Doctor, principal analyst at Outsell." Facebook and Snapchat are two digital sources of information that have seemingly captured the attention of younger generations. Yet it is interesting to read an article where an educated author believes that there is not infinite amounts of room for the niche web publishers. 

One question we must ask ourselves, as consumers, is this: Do we choose digital media out of covenience and cost? Or in a quest to consume the largest, most up-to-date information? In our class today, Iris asked us if we would pay for the Skimm and there were few hands that went up, stating they would. While major networking sites have engrained themselves into our society, is it really fathomable that niche sites will further take over the media platform that exists today? In my opinion, I think users will begin to shy away from using digital media as much once they realize how large corporations like Facebook and Google are able to track their usage and adjust the information they see online. 

This article, also from Digiday, claims the future is bright for digital media this year: It gets better: How digital media will improve in 2016 However, I think that two obstacles, revenue and competitive advantage, will make it difficult for many media outlets to succeed. 

Searching for Your Niche on an Infinite Bookshelf

I think this article takes a deeper look at how the digitized media is enabling consumers, rather than arming them with distraction and greed. I find it extremely interesting how the ability to consume infinite works influences users to pursue more intricate, niche-type interests. However, I think this partly stems from the constant harassment of the media by shoving popular culture into every outlet, day-in and day-out. For example, when you turn on the radio, you hear the same music playing on the top stations. They want to reach the largest audience possible and, therefore, find this to be the solution. However, the article by Chris Anderson evaluates a future predicament these media outlets might be facing. The overuse of popular music, TV, and movies forces users to find other types of entertainment to avoid boredom.

This quote from the article struck me, in particular: "When you think about it, most successful businesses on the Internet are about aggregating the Long Tail in one way or another." As mainstream media has established a normalcy of "greatest hits", it is crucial that innovative companies find ways to appeal to the true interests of users. In my opinion, popular media is more of a cultural expectation rather than an interest. You endorse popular media so that you can participate in conversations with friends, co-workers, or classmates about films, music, or books. However, with the accessibility the online sphere provides, users are going to begin to use outlets such as Rhapsody to endorse their true interests. In the next decade, being "different" rather conforming to the social norm may be the new cultural trend. 

Here is a link that I found helpful that proceeded to sum up the article: Long Tail Summary.

The Adversity around Attention

Attention is underrated in our day and age. These two articles, "Welcome to the Attention Economy" and "Information Surplus in the Digital Age" both stuck out to me. Firstly, the article regarding the attention deficit present in our society stuck out to me, as it acknowledged what I find to be a "silent" issue in our society. The article goes as far as to say that, "attention has become a more valuable currency than the kind you store in bank accounts." I agree with this because I think, in the day and age where information is constantly circulating, you must be able to afford to be attentive. The media industry is no longer black and white, therefore you it takes time to make sense of the different technologies and to make accurate perceptions on information. Everything comes in such vast quantities so it is brutally easy to overlook an important piece of information that you might categorize as a detail.

The second article posted elaborates on the idea of information surplus. This article was very enlightening to me as I am constantly trying to retain as much information as possible. However, I never stop to ask myself, "When is enough, enough?" I find it challenging to dissect the information placed in front of me on social media and online, as the amount of information can be overwhelming. I find it interesting that in the "Information Surplus in the Digital Age" article, the Iris connects the attention deficit with users' willingness to pay for online news outlets. Individuals are now on-the-go, however the need for information has only grown. When will the time come where our brains are overstimulated, to a point where we can no longer move at such a quick, "efficient" pace?