Old Media vs. New Media

Discussion in 'Art & Culture' started by Bowser, Mar 31, 2017.

?

Which source of information and entertainment do you prefer?

  1. I rely on television and the paper for my information and entertainment needs.

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. I rely on the online experience for my information and entertainment needs.

    3 vote(s)
    60.0%
  3. I like to mix it up and use both as a source of information and entertainment.

    2 vote(s)
    40.0%
  1. Bowser Life is Fatal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,837
    Will the old media (television and print) become a thing of the past? With all the information available online, who needs turn on the television or read the paper? I think YouTube and other social networks have the power to bring down the networks. Remember Block Buster Video before Netflix and Red Box?
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    22,897
    The question then becomes: where is news going to come from? Other new material ?

    So far the new media have been acting as a sort of parasite, leeching off the decades - centuries, even - of built up cultural stock. But they are going to run out of other people's skills and work. Is youtube going to apprentice the next generation of journalists?
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,293
    i am so glad blockbuster is gone. If you were late you had fees. new media is definitely better, efficient and user friendly. Netflix is great because there is no commercials and you can choose what to watch. I think that should be the wave of the future where television is not interupted by commercials. It is really annoying and rude how many commercials there are just like popups and spam.There should be only commercials in between programs. Redbox > blockbuster too.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,113
    My son has a 5 year degree in "new media" like video, computer and LED displays...this versus "traditional media" like oil paint, charcoal etc. I doubt that video, soundtrack software and 3 D plastic printers will somehow replace those traditional media. Why? Because part of what make a work of art is the skill and experience of the artist as well as his/her originality. Also, art is meant to be "permanent". Without electricity, that video display is just a black plastic screen, but the oil painting or the marble sculpture is still there and observable.

    Further, we have discovered that we learn differently when we read material on a screen as opposed to from a book. Different brain structures are involved so your attention and retention of the material is strongly affected by your choice of media.
     
  8. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,293
    Is it the tactile experience or that having a book in hand induces more retention since one can get more situated comfortably while reading?

    I don't like kindle type readers as i think the light from it is not good for the eyes either for long periods of time as well as probably some type of radiation from all electronic devices. I like books and still enjoy reading books itself.

    Of course, as that is real art from scratch as in the 'create' and in some respects organic aspect whereas a lot of computer graphic arts is more the 'management/arrangement' of it. But then again, the tools used are different as even computer graphics can take a lot of skill/finesse and artistic effort and ability as you can draw and paint with it too. It's just the difference between using a paintbrush vs a mouse etc but anything done from scratch would be more labor intensive and developmentally better at least for physiology too, like exercising our digits. Someone having to build a wood fire to start cooking and controlling the heat would be more skilled than someone who just has to turn on the stove etc. But then again, it all depends on what is important too in where we do the benefit/loss assessment so one can focus elsewhere more etc.
     
    Last edited: Mar 31, 2017
  9. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,263
    Google "OK Go." They are a musical group who has made their mark by using primarily "new media" (Youtube) to get their creations out there - and they are far more creative than most traditional bands.
     
  10. exchemist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,560
    Agree. As we are rapidly discovering, what you need to pay for in your sources of information is editorship.

    YouTube is full of crap, as we so often need to point out to naive posters here. Fake news is becoming something we are learning to be sensitive about.

    I feel cautiously optimistic that people will learn the value of curation of good quality information. That may not mean traditional newspapers or TV, but it will be a lot more disciplined than social media.

    Wikipaedia is an interesting crowd-sourced model, for information that is not time-sensitive. Time-sensitive information, by which I suppose I mean "news", current affairs and topical commentary on it, can't so easily be crowd-sourced in this way, however. I expect there will still be a role for the journalist and his or her editor, in some form.
     
  11. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,010
    No, the kindle doesn't use power except to turn the page and for Wi-Fi, which can be switched off. The kindle is one of the best inventions in recent history!

    Anyway, I get all my TV off the internet, so the lines are blurred.
     
  12. Michael 歌舞伎 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    20,242
    Most co-called "News" is a complete waste of time. Most News is Newertainment and is so narrative-driven to pretty much fall under the banner of fake. The only one who needs you to have daily 'update' are the people who want to influence your world view. An example of this could be the current race-war. Sure, White Americans commit less violent crimes compared with Black Americans, but are killed by the police more often - that's not the Narrative the media wove. It wove a tale of Police Violence and "White racism", it cast a Latin man as a White man and then edited his 911 call to paint the picture they wanted the pubic to believe in. Probably as part of the run up to the election last year.

    Watching the news is, for the most part, a waste of time. If you want to know something, about a given topic, read actual analysis.

    So, let's hope Old News dies a quick death, and is not replaced with news, but with actual objective analysis. Perhaps open source algo's.
     
  13. Stoniphi obscurely fossiliferous Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,113
    I can't recall where I encountered the actual article at this time, but they ran an MRI of the subjects brains as they read from both a regular paper book and an electronic e-reader. Distinctly different areas of the subjects brains lit up as they read, and the areas were different depending on which of the sources they were using. The conclusion of the study was that information gleaned from e-readers didn't stick as well as the information read from paper books. My apologies for not providing reference citations, I was only interested in my own choice.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    I personally use both sources for written material.

    "New media" covers a vast field of things, some of my work is done in "new media". As with all else though, there is a wide range of what we refer to as "quality" in those items.
     

Share This Page