Alternate Realty Games are becoming a new phenomenon. In the reading Jane McConigal argues that these games can be taken to serious by some people, but used in real life setting, it can cause group think, increase problem solving and increase teamwork. The question that arises is this, do players get so immersed into the game that they lose their own self into part of the game, or are they consciously aware of their surroundings, knowing they are part of a bigger online, “pseudo world?”
The argument towards readers getting carried away games from Richard Schechner, he describes two types of play. These two types are “make believe, and make belief. [40, p.35] He states that the first protects the boundaries between what is real and what is pretend, while the latter intentionally blurs them.” This can happen to those who get wrapped up in gaming and believe that they play an actual role in the game, and take form of the character they play. It can lead to addiction or delusions or those who lose all track of time and social life consumed in these fake worlds. However, the lesson that came be learned from the ARG games seem to outweigh the cons. McGonagall argues that , “when(addiction) perceived negatively, immersion in games nevertheless has been seen as a conscious, if ill advised, choice to surrender the pleasures or narrative, role-lay or well-defined goals and limit. ( 8) Even lessons game be learned from these games. For example, a Norwegian boy saved his own sisters life, using skills he learned in World Of Warcraft. Now this may seem to be an outlandish type story, however, conventions such as the following, “Dr. Strangelearn and his army of Mad Scientist friends are all characters in Tandem Learning’s latest alternate reality game designed to enhance the upcoming DevLearn 2010 conference in San Francisco from November 3rd to 5th. The conference, sponsored by The eLearning Guild, will focus on technology-enhanced organizational learning and knowledge-sharing strategies. The Mad Scientists are being played by learning industry experts whose true identities will be unveiled at the conference and on Twitter. At DevLearn10, there will be sessions at the Dr. Strangelearn Information Stations where participants will have a chance to meet the experts. This year, attendees of DevLearn10 will be exposed to many new learning strategies, and Dr. Strangelearn’s Learning Laboratory will help DevLearn10 participants handle organizational objections to implementing those strategies when they get back to the office. Through the game, research, case studies, and academic papers are being shared with players to arm them with what they need to convince their organizations of the feasibility and value of new learning strategies,” are using ARG games to education, create information and even arm them with more knowledge.
So the question remains, are ARG games bad or the future of learning and knowledge. I would have to aim on the side of good. Users are self conscious of what they log into and what they are viewing. It takes time and effort to search out these games, become part of these worlds, and work together for the common good. Just as McGonagall mentions viewers searching out the Blair Witch Project webisodes, it takes effort to become part of these online realities. Without the proper time, knowledge, skill or interest the gamers and participants or ARG games enthusiasts must search out these well known treasures. Who knows, the next Einstein may develop because of skills he learned in an ARG.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Viral Marketing, The Key To Reaching Out To Many Media Outlets For 1 Goal
"Consumers are learning how to use these different media technologies to bring the flow of media more fully under their control and to interact with other consumers. The promises of this new media environment raise expectation of a freer flow of ideas and content." This is what Henry Jenkis said in the text, and I could not agree more. Technology and media companies have to work hand in hand to help spread the word and make all facets of technology intertwine to keep viewers on their toes, as well as make them feel even more a part of whatever television show, video game, or even movie they are promoting. By using video games, internet scavenger hunts and viral marketing, they are making viewers become more interactive and make consumers feel like they are a part of this community.
I will discuss two separate viral campaigns, one for a movie and the second for a musician that aimed to get fans to follow the trail at his concerts and discover USB drives, that contained clues and even hidden tracks, that were hidden at the venues . Both of these campaigns tied into either a CD release or a movie release, got fans interested and let them feel a part of the “hunt.” This not only provided fans to delve into the world of Batman: The Dark Knight, but also into a secret scavenger hunt at Nine Inch Nails shows.
First off, the website www.whysoserious.com, was dedicated to Batman: The Dark Knight. Here is a synopsis I found on the web, with all of the details behind what was involved.
In May 2007, 42 Entertainment began a viral marketing campaign utilizing the film's "Why So Serious?" tagline with the launch of a website featuring the fictional political campaign of Harvey Dent, with the caption, "I Believe in Harvey Dent."[ The site aimed to interest fans by having them try to earn what they wanted to see and, on behalf of Warner Bros., 42 Entertainment also established a "vandalized" version of I Believe in Harvey Dent, called "I believe in Harvey Dent too," where e-mails sent by fans slowly removed pixels revealing the first official image of the Joker; it was ultimately replaced with many "Haha"s and a hidden message that said "see you in December
“WhySoSerious.com directed fans to find letters composing the Joker’s message "The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules," to send in photographs of these letters, and then featured their photos in a collage.
During the 2007 Comic Con’s, 42 Entertainment launched WhySoSerious.com, sending fans on a scavenger hunt to unlock a teaser trailer and a new photo of the Joker. On October 31, 2007, the film's website morphed into another scavenger hunt with hidden messages, instructing fans to uncover clues at certain locations in major cities throughout the United States, and to take photographs of their discoveries. The clues combined to reveal a new photograph of the Joker and an audio clip of him from the film saying "And tonight, you're gonna break your one rule." Completing the scavenger hunt also led to another website called Rory's Death Kiss (referencing the false working title of Rory's First Kiss), where fans could submit photographs of themselves costumed as the Joker. Those who sent photos were mailed a copy of a fictional newspaper called The Gotham Times, whose electronic version led to the discovery of numerous other websites.
Numbers In March 2008, Harvey Dent's fictional campaign informed fans that actual campaign buses nicknamed "Dentmobiles" would tour various cities to promote Dent's candidacy for district attorney.”
This was a brilliant way to incorporate fans, and make them feel part of something large. It helped to build hype over many different facets of media, and got fans extremely excited. It tied all media facets working together to build massive hype, months before the movie was released. (info came from Wikipedia, directed from the actual whysoserious website, all info has been approved by film producers, or else I would never have used Wikipedia.)
Secondly, Nine Inch Nails did something that no other band has ever done. They band created an alternative online game called Year Zero, the title of their upcoming game. If you want to read more about the game just research Nine In Nails, Year Zero Game. The band would hide clues for this game in clothing they sold at their tours, as well as plant random USB drives with new songs, clues and other goodies throughout venues, and give fans that were part of their online community clues as to where they could find them. All of the members of this community would have to team up, and combine what they received on their drives, to fully complete the game, it was almost like Second Life. This facet combined music sales, with an online game and even a scavenger hunt, the first time in history that this has been done, and has yet to be repeated. The concept was so deep it even invoked the interests of USA Today, Rolling Stones and other newspaper as well, and also every major music site.
Both of these ploys could have done without any of the promotion, however it only helped to build hype and get fans even more involved, especially the die hard fans. This is exactly what Jenkins was talking about. Having many different platforms such as scavenger hunts for USB drives, or even just becoming even more intrigued by a scavenger hunt and game online for Batman, definitely broke boundaries, and I believe that television and the movie and music industry need to embrace spreading their wings, and reaching out to people over various media outlets. People need to adapt, and if they do, Jenkins message will have worked.
I will discuss two separate viral campaigns, one for a movie and the second for a musician that aimed to get fans to follow the trail at his concerts and discover USB drives, that contained clues and even hidden tracks, that were hidden at the venues . Both of these campaigns tied into either a CD release or a movie release, got fans interested and let them feel a part of the “hunt.” This not only provided fans to delve into the world of Batman: The Dark Knight, but also into a secret scavenger hunt at Nine Inch Nails shows.
First off, the website www.whysoserious.com, was dedicated to Batman: The Dark Knight. Here is a synopsis I found on the web, with all of the details behind what was involved.
In May 2007, 42 Entertainment began a viral marketing campaign utilizing the film's "Why So Serious?" tagline with the launch of a website featuring the fictional political campaign of Harvey Dent, with the caption, "I Believe in Harvey Dent."[ The site aimed to interest fans by having them try to earn what they wanted to see and, on behalf of Warner Bros., 42 Entertainment also established a "vandalized" version of I Believe in Harvey Dent, called "I believe in Harvey Dent too," where e-mails sent by fans slowly removed pixels revealing the first official image of the Joker; it was ultimately replaced with many "Haha"s and a hidden message that said "see you in December
“WhySoSerious.com directed fans to find letters composing the Joker’s message "The only sensible way to live in this world is without rules," to send in photographs of these letters, and then featured their photos in a collage.
During the 2007 Comic Con’s, 42 Entertainment launched WhySoSerious.com, sending fans on a scavenger hunt to unlock a teaser trailer and a new photo of the Joker. On October 31, 2007, the film's website morphed into another scavenger hunt with hidden messages, instructing fans to uncover clues at certain locations in major cities throughout the United States, and to take photographs of their discoveries. The clues combined to reveal a new photograph of the Joker and an audio clip of him from the film saying "And tonight, you're gonna break your one rule." Completing the scavenger hunt also led to another website called Rory's Death Kiss (referencing the false working title of Rory's First Kiss), where fans could submit photographs of themselves costumed as the Joker. Those who sent photos were mailed a copy of a fictional newspaper called The Gotham Times, whose electronic version led to the discovery of numerous other websites.
Numbers In March 2008, Harvey Dent's fictional campaign informed fans that actual campaign buses nicknamed "Dentmobiles" would tour various cities to promote Dent's candidacy for district attorney.”
This was a brilliant way to incorporate fans, and make them feel part of something large. It helped to build hype over many different facets of media, and got fans extremely excited. It tied all media facets working together to build massive hype, months before the movie was released. (info came from Wikipedia, directed from the actual whysoserious website, all info has been approved by film producers, or else I would never have used Wikipedia.)
Secondly, Nine Inch Nails did something that no other band has ever done. They band created an alternative online game called Year Zero, the title of their upcoming game. If you want to read more about the game just research Nine In Nails, Year Zero Game. The band would hide clues for this game in clothing they sold at their tours, as well as plant random USB drives with new songs, clues and other goodies throughout venues, and give fans that were part of their online community clues as to where they could find them. All of the members of this community would have to team up, and combine what they received on their drives, to fully complete the game, it was almost like Second Life. This facet combined music sales, with an online game and even a scavenger hunt, the first time in history that this has been done, and has yet to be repeated. The concept was so deep it even invoked the interests of USA Today, Rolling Stones and other newspaper as well, and also every major music site.
Both of these ploys could have done without any of the promotion, however it only helped to build hype and get fans even more involved, especially the die hard fans. This is exactly what Jenkins was talking about. Having many different platforms such as scavenger hunts for USB drives, or even just becoming even more intrigued by a scavenger hunt and game online for Batman, definitely broke boundaries, and I believe that television and the movie and music industry need to embrace spreading their wings, and reaching out to people over various media outlets. People need to adapt, and if they do, Jenkins message will have worked.
Facebook Update: I'm Naked (Wait That's Supposed To Be Private)
Is society aware of what Facebook has done to “privacy,” Danah Boyd would argue that many are completely unaware of the implications we are getting ourselves into when opting in to these “cool,” websites. Many are uneducated, and getting themselves into a lot more than what they bargained for in the end. Is privacy still alive, or has the definition of privacy changed since Facebook, Myspace and other social networking sites have popped up online in the last 10 or so years?
An excerpt from Boyd’s “Facebook Privacy Settings: Who Cares? Reads:
“When Facebook introduced new options for sharing content, the default was to share broadly. For example, when the site introduced a setting that allowed users to choose whether or not their basic profile content would be shared with search engines, the default was yes, meaning that people’s profile content would come up whenever someone searched for their name on Google, regardless of whether or not the person searching was logged into Facebook. As with many other changes made by Facebook, when Facebook chose to make the content available to search engines, it simply introduced a new setting: “public search” and enabled sharing to search engines by default. Default settings matter, because research has shown that most people rarely change them (Mackay, 1991)”.
This shows just how tricky the people at Facebook are and how socially aware people must be when new options are integrated into their Facebook accounts, because many do not take the time to go in and change these settings, or even read the long drawn out disclaimers that pop-up each time a new privacy issue goes into effect of Facebook. According to Boyd’s research only 26% of current Facebook users have changed their privacy settings 4 or more times throughout all of the changes Facebook has made.
However, this is not really the issue, what is, is what used to be considered taboo and strange, such as knowing where people are, seeing random pictures of them drinking or even knowing the minute they get engaged is now public knowledge because of Facebook. No longer do we have any privacy, if we choose to post these pits and pieces of information onto the Internet. Instead, all we have to do is click someone’s profile and we can see them at the most recent party bonging a beer. This used to only be known by those who were in attendance, however now we are able to see all of this information at the click of a mouse.
What once used to be considered sacred and private, seems to no longer matter to anyone, or at least the majority of the users of Facebook. What we as society used to see as unacceptable and taboo, is no just common knowledge that everyone seems like the have the right to know. If you do not keep your profile updated, people get upset with you, because they are unable to know what is going on in your life. It is scary to think what some of the images and information we post on Facebook now, could be used for in the future. Will it cost us jobs, promotions, Presidential nominations? It just may, but “privacy,” as we know it has changed and things seem like they are only going to get more personal and less private as new social networks begin to appear.
An excerpt from Boyd’s “Facebook Privacy Settings: Who Cares? Reads:
“When Facebook introduced new options for sharing content, the default was to share broadly. For example, when the site introduced a setting that allowed users to choose whether or not their basic profile content would be shared with search engines, the default was yes, meaning that people’s profile content would come up whenever someone searched for their name on Google, regardless of whether or not the person searching was logged into Facebook. As with many other changes made by Facebook, when Facebook chose to make the content available to search engines, it simply introduced a new setting: “public search” and enabled sharing to search engines by default. Default settings matter, because research has shown that most people rarely change them (Mackay, 1991)”.
This shows just how tricky the people at Facebook are and how socially aware people must be when new options are integrated into their Facebook accounts, because many do not take the time to go in and change these settings, or even read the long drawn out disclaimers that pop-up each time a new privacy issue goes into effect of Facebook. According to Boyd’s research only 26% of current Facebook users have changed their privacy settings 4 or more times throughout all of the changes Facebook has made.
However, this is not really the issue, what is, is what used to be considered taboo and strange, such as knowing where people are, seeing random pictures of them drinking or even knowing the minute they get engaged is now public knowledge because of Facebook. No longer do we have any privacy, if we choose to post these pits and pieces of information onto the Internet. Instead, all we have to do is click someone’s profile and we can see them at the most recent party bonging a beer. This used to only be known by those who were in attendance, however now we are able to see all of this information at the click of a mouse.
What once used to be considered sacred and private, seems to no longer matter to anyone, or at least the majority of the users of Facebook. What we as society used to see as unacceptable and taboo, is no just common knowledge that everyone seems like the have the right to know. If you do not keep your profile updated, people get upset with you, because they are unable to know what is going on in your life. It is scary to think what some of the images and information we post on Facebook now, could be used for in the future. Will it cost us jobs, promotions, Presidential nominations? It just may, but “privacy,” as we know it has changed and things seem like they are only going to get more personal and less private as new social networks begin to appear.
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Wikipedia and Politics
"A Wikipedia article is a process, not a product, and as a result, it is never finished," says Clay Shirkey, author of Here Comes Everybody. He describes Wikipedia as a collective knowledge base where anyone can contribute information on any topic at any time. What results is one of the most up-to-date, detailed, and (usually) accurate sources of information on the web.
Because of these things, Wikipedia is currently one of the most visited websites in the United States. So, in the search results for nearly any subject on any popular search engine will have the Wikipedia page near the top of relevant sites. Of course, there are many positive and negative implications that come along with Wikipedia's ease of accessibility and editing.
To exemplify the fluidity and popularity of Wikipedia, let's examine the way in which the site was used in the 2008 elections.
Wikipedia articles were one of the first pages to appear after a search for any given candidate. And because these pages were completely user generated, campaigns had very little control over what was posted on their candidates page. Of course, it is the campaign's desire to paint their candidate in the most positive light possible. So, naturally, they want the page to be as factually accurate as possible. Or do they?
Supporters of former North Carolina Senator John Edwards apparently wanted to omit the highly publicized $400 dollar haircuts he received on the campaign trail. Mitt Romney's campaign were attempting to leave out details of his two weddings--one for a Mormon audience, and one for those who were not part of the religion. And Fred Thompson supporters were allegedly trying to conceal the fact that the former Senator from Tennessee's birth name was "Freddie."
Of course these are all minor biographical details about each individual, but all these pieces of information ended up being accurate--and they would have probably not been as widely known had it not been for Wikipedia. Because any one can post anything on any subject, that information sees the light of day.
However, this free and fast information comes with a price. Wikipedia, being user generated, often faces questions of legitimacy. And sometimes this questioning is legitimate, as the site has seen it's fair share of vandalism. For example, the page for President Obama has been attacked with false information and pictures on several occasions. In one instance a picture of a naked black man was posted as a picture of Obama on his Wikipedia page. However, in this case, the picture was taken down only two minutes after being posted.
Shirky says, "Mass amateurization of publishing makes mass amateurization of filtering a forced move." He claims that this publish-then-filter system is the only working system in social media. So while Wikipedia is definitely susceptible to its pitfalls, this is the only way it can work. However, in the end, what makes it vulnerable to such vandalism is also what makes it such a valuable tool in the information age.
Because of these things, Wikipedia is currently one of the most visited websites in the United States. So, in the search results for nearly any subject on any popular search engine will have the Wikipedia page near the top of relevant sites. Of course, there are many positive and negative implications that come along with Wikipedia's ease of accessibility and editing.
To exemplify the fluidity and popularity of Wikipedia, let's examine the way in which the site was used in the 2008 elections.
Wikipedia articles were one of the first pages to appear after a search for any given candidate. And because these pages were completely user generated, campaigns had very little control over what was posted on their candidates page. Of course, it is the campaign's desire to paint their candidate in the most positive light possible. So, naturally, they want the page to be as factually accurate as possible. Or do they?
Supporters of former North Carolina Senator John Edwards apparently wanted to omit the highly publicized $400 dollar haircuts he received on the campaign trail. Mitt Romney's campaign were attempting to leave out details of his two weddings--one for a Mormon audience, and one for those who were not part of the religion. And Fred Thompson supporters were allegedly trying to conceal the fact that the former Senator from Tennessee's birth name was "Freddie."
Of course these are all minor biographical details about each individual, but all these pieces of information ended up being accurate--and they would have probably not been as widely known had it not been for Wikipedia. Because any one can post anything on any subject, that information sees the light of day.
However, this free and fast information comes with a price. Wikipedia, being user generated, often faces questions of legitimacy. And sometimes this questioning is legitimate, as the site has seen it's fair share of vandalism. For example, the page for President Obama has been attacked with false information and pictures on several occasions. In one instance a picture of a naked black man was posted as a picture of Obama on his Wikipedia page. However, in this case, the picture was taken down only two minutes after being posted.
Shirky says, "Mass amateurization of publishing makes mass amateurization of filtering a forced move." He claims that this publish-then-filter system is the only working system in social media. So while Wikipedia is definitely susceptible to its pitfalls, this is the only way it can work. However, in the end, what makes it vulnerable to such vandalism is also what makes it such a valuable tool in the information age.
The New and Improved Transmedia Storytelling of Marvel Comics
Henry Jenkins has layed out a set of basic characteristics and components for what he calls transmedia storytelling. According to Jenkins, "Transmedia storytelling represents a process where integral elements of a fiction get dispersed systematically across multiple delivery channels for the purpose of creating a unified and coordinated entertainment experience." It is storytelling created by horizontally integrated media companies, which is oftentimes encyclopedic, and built off of the creation of entire fictional worlds.
Transmedia storytelling is something that is becoming increasingly popular. In a culture that is becoming driven by consumption and consumers that are, more and more, accessing media in a variety of ways, it is something that is becoming almost necessary for the ongoing success of a franchise. To exemplify this, let's take a look at Marvel Comics.
Marvel Publishing Inc., which most people will recognize for their characters such as Spider-man and Iron-man, are increasingly making use of such transmedia storytelling, and becoming very successful in doing so. Marvel began primarily as a comic book publisher, but in recent years have extended their brand into television, film, video games, toys, and more. They have developed characters and storylines and worlds across all of these platforms to the point where it is encyclopedic (Marvel Comics Database).
Up until recent years however, much of this storytelling on Marvel's part has been disjointed, with special regard to the relationship between movies and comic books. Many of the storylines in their movies ignore or even contradict the stories from their other movies and comics. Each one existed as it's own separate entity, or as a direct retelling from an already existing comic book. And even within the comic books there exist a multitude of realities, unrelated to one another. To exemplify this, look no further than the 60+ different incarnations of Spider-man.
Now, however, Marvel has become more aware or more skilled at transmedia storytelling. A few years ago, they launched a massive reboot of movies based on their characters, including Iron-man and the Incredible Hulk, with future plans of releasing movies based on Thor, Captain America, and Ant-man. They are even planning to release new Spider-man films, so that the character can be part of the rebooted canon.
And all of these movies are intertwined. They may not feature all of the same characters, but through cameos and other storytelling devices, it has been made apparent that all of the events in these movies are taking place in the same fictional world. With the reboot of these movies, Marvel has also had launched new comic book series' and created video games that are meant to expand on story. They even have plans on making an Avengers movie, which would take all of the characters from the above mentioned films and put them all in the same film.
They are doing all of this through following the basic guidelines put forth by Henry Jenkins, and they are staying very successful because of it, in spite of waning comic book sales. They have learned to reach a variety of audiences through a variety of mediums, without abandoning any particular medium. And all the while they are able to make each individual piece of fiction coherent and enjoyable, regardless of the platform. Because of this, I think Marvel exemplifies how good transmedia storytelling is something that is and will continue to be important for the success of many forms of fictional media.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Piracy, it is a problem
On Monday in class, we discussed the issue about piracy. According to W. James Potter, "Piracy, in its simpliest form, is the unauthorized use of copyright material" (p.302). Anything everything can literally be pirated by somebody else, whether it is the music you hear, the book that you read, or the movie that you watch, it can all be pirated by someone else or even you, the reader of this blog, can pirate something. Now, while most people will not come right out and say that they have pirated something illegally, people do it all the time and believe that it is a perfectly fine thing to do, I mean, who would want to pay the money to go see a movie in the movie theather or rent it from a store when they can just burn a copy of it at home on their computer? Most of the people the pirate things believe that they are doing a good thing, when in essence, what they are doing is actually a bad thing and technically, what they are doing is illegal and wrong.
Piracy is a becoming quite the controversial topic, but it is not a recent issue actually. According to what Potter says on pages 303 and 304 of our textbook, "Piracy has been a problem for the music industry for decades. As early as the 1950s, people used tape recorders to pirate music by recording it off the radio. People could also make a copy of a record or tape cassette using home-recording equipment, but to do so, they had to already have a copy of the recording and could make only one copy at a time." Wow, people in the 1950s copying and pirating music off the radio....and to think people are making burnt cds with music on it in today's modern society. People back then where making copies of music on blank cassette players, and that actually kept on happening for quite some time as I actually used to have a couple of cassette tapes with music on it that was copied from radio stations, but now, not just music is being copied illegally as movies are becoming quite to item to pirate nowadays too.
Movies have become to hot commodity to pirate here lately it seems, and pirating movies has gotten so out of hand, the lawsuits have been filed against some websites, especially thepiratebay.org. In the following YouTube video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qsm1gd8EuA, it talks about how Sweden filed a law-suit against Pirate Bay for breaking Sweden's copyright laws. What ended up happening is that on the second day the law suit was in place, Sweden dropped half of its charges on Pirate Bay because they made a technical error on how a bit torrent works. The lawsuit itself ended up being a rather big financial issue and fines were placed and other things happened, but as of today, Pirate Bay is still up and running, and you can get pirated music, movies, and other things from that website too.
So all in all, I feel that pirating is in fact a big issue although most seem to believe that it is not. Whenever someone makes an illegal copy of a movie, cd, etc they are stealing things that are not theirs from the original creator that made it. Yes, I am sure that people will still be pirating things long after I am gone and I am fully aware of this as well. When people pirate things, they are breaking copyright laws and literally taking away money from the person or people that made the original music, movie, etc. I strongly believe that people should not pirate things illegally from the internet which is way I feel that certain website, expecially music ones like LimeWire, should be taken down, but I am sure that the general consensus would disagree and believe that all pirated websites, not just LimeWire, should stay online because it's an easy way to get music. Pirating will always be a controversial issue to talk about because people feel that getting movies, music, etc from places like piratebay.org is fine, but really, everyone that goes to those type of places are breaking laws and do not seem to care.
Piracy is a becoming quite the controversial topic, but it is not a recent issue actually. According to what Potter says on pages 303 and 304 of our textbook, "Piracy has been a problem for the music industry for decades. As early as the 1950s, people used tape recorders to pirate music by recording it off the radio. People could also make a copy of a record or tape cassette using home-recording equipment, but to do so, they had to already have a copy of the recording and could make only one copy at a time." Wow, people in the 1950s copying and pirating music off the radio....and to think people are making burnt cds with music on it in today's modern society. People back then where making copies of music on blank cassette players, and that actually kept on happening for quite some time as I actually used to have a couple of cassette tapes with music on it that was copied from radio stations, but now, not just music is being copied illegally as movies are becoming quite to item to pirate nowadays too.
Movies have become to hot commodity to pirate here lately it seems, and pirating movies has gotten so out of hand, the lawsuits have been filed against some websites, especially thepiratebay.org. In the following YouTube video, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Qsm1gd8EuA, it talks about how Sweden filed a law-suit against Pirate Bay for breaking Sweden's copyright laws. What ended up happening is that on the second day the law suit was in place, Sweden dropped half of its charges on Pirate Bay because they made a technical error on how a bit torrent works. The lawsuit itself ended up being a rather big financial issue and fines were placed and other things happened, but as of today, Pirate Bay is still up and running, and you can get pirated music, movies, and other things from that website too.
So all in all, I feel that pirating is in fact a big issue although most seem to believe that it is not. Whenever someone makes an illegal copy of a movie, cd, etc they are stealing things that are not theirs from the original creator that made it. Yes, I am sure that people will still be pirating things long after I am gone and I am fully aware of this as well. When people pirate things, they are breaking copyright laws and literally taking away money from the person or people that made the original music, movie, etc. I strongly believe that people should not pirate things illegally from the internet which is way I feel that certain website, expecially music ones like LimeWire, should be taken down, but I am sure that the general consensus would disagree and believe that all pirated websites, not just LimeWire, should stay online because it's an easy way to get music. Pirating will always be a controversial issue to talk about because people feel that getting movies, music, etc from places like piratebay.org is fine, but really, everyone that goes to those type of places are breaking laws and do not seem to care.
Monday, December 13, 2010
We Are All Pirates, Because We All Own At Least One Burnt CD....OH NO!
Arrrgh Maity. Media piracy is threating both the Music and Movie Industry severely, however what must people do not recognize is that it actually benefits these industries as well. There are both negative and upsides to this issue both which will be addressed and how piracy will never end. It has been happening for ages, such as Napster, LimeWire, KaZa and IRC and has just lately become the forefront of news with sites such Pirate Bay being all over the news. Even though PirateBay was “shut down, they just switched server locations and are alive and well once again. Some companies realize people want free or cheap media and are starting to adapt to this theory by allowing new means of getting media.
Music artists do not suffer from music piracy, this is a fact, that has been told to me by many musicians I have interviewed in the past when asking them about how they feel about illegal downloading. Most musicians do not see any money from record sales, all of their income is derived from tours and merchandise they sell on tour. The suits, or label owners are the ones that take all the profits from record sales. Most bands never see a cent from an album they release on a major label unless the record goes platinum or they release it independently. This has spurred many bands such as Radio Head to create websites where they allow fans to name their own price for an album. It can be anywhere from free to 1 million dollars, they feel like the fan show know what the music is worth.
Another upside to piracy is that it is allowing many bands to become exposed to the masses, because someone has downloaded their CD illegally. This leads them to become a fan and in return go to concerts, buy merchandise and may even buy the album if they want the full feature with album art extra. Vinyl records are also becoming more popular because they cannot be pirated and come with amazing artwork and special edition colors of the albums, this is another way bands are trying to combat piracy.
When a record company tries to sue a grandma for downloading Lady GaGa songs for $100,00, and saying each song on a computer is worth $10,00 dollars, they are just infuriating consumers even more. If the RIAA is going to fine someone for a song they downloaded, charge them what iTunes charges, $1.29. The legal tactics are not scaring anyone, because most lawsuit cases have been thrown out of court.
Bandcamp.com, a newer website has started up, allowing bands to offer their albums at name your own price, or lower costs for a digital download and offer the album in every bitrate possible. You can get HI-FI audio or just plain old MP3 quality, this is offering fans to purchase music at a much more reasonable price than what larger retailers are selling music for. Comeandlive.com, is the newest site to evolve, where they allow you to download any artist on their roster for free and then if you enjoy the album, you can purchase different limited edition versions that come with rare sweatshirts, limited pressings of the record and other material that cannot be pirated. (Check this site out, they are a christian label that has an amazing roster, not all bands preach to you and all music is free. If you do purchase they donate their funds to charitable organizations. Give it a whirl, I've found some great artists here, especially Showbread)
It seems like the only people that are really worried about piracy are the larger major labels, who refuse to adapt to the techniques smaller labels are using. These smaller labels are making music more accessible and they are even starting to chart on the Billboard top 100, where as some major label release fail to even do that. Major labels need to realize that times are changing and they must adapt or else people will continue to steal their music, because they are offering their consumers nothing but an album, whereas these other sites offer rare goodies and other benefits if you purchase their albums.
Movie piracy is something that I think may begin to decline, now that Redbox has come about. It is nice to be able to rent a movie for a dollar instead of $4.99 at Family Video, and it is much more convenient. However, as society becomes more technologically savvy, people are going to find it easier to find free media online. The industry is going to have to adapt or else piracy is going to continue at a rate faster than the speed of light.
Music artists do not suffer from music piracy, this is a fact, that has been told to me by many musicians I have interviewed in the past when asking them about how they feel about illegal downloading. Most musicians do not see any money from record sales, all of their income is derived from tours and merchandise they sell on tour. The suits, or label owners are the ones that take all the profits from record sales. Most bands never see a cent from an album they release on a major label unless the record goes platinum or they release it independently. This has spurred many bands such as Radio Head to create websites where they allow fans to name their own price for an album. It can be anywhere from free to 1 million dollars, they feel like the fan show know what the music is worth.
Another upside to piracy is that it is allowing many bands to become exposed to the masses, because someone has downloaded their CD illegally. This leads them to become a fan and in return go to concerts, buy merchandise and may even buy the album if they want the full feature with album art extra. Vinyl records are also becoming more popular because they cannot be pirated and come with amazing artwork and special edition colors of the albums, this is another way bands are trying to combat piracy.
When a record company tries to sue a grandma for downloading Lady GaGa songs for $100,00, and saying each song on a computer is worth $10,00 dollars, they are just infuriating consumers even more. If the RIAA is going to fine someone for a song they downloaded, charge them what iTunes charges, $1.29. The legal tactics are not scaring anyone, because most lawsuit cases have been thrown out of court.
Bandcamp.com, a newer website has started up, allowing bands to offer their albums at name your own price, or lower costs for a digital download and offer the album in every bitrate possible. You can get HI-FI audio or just plain old MP3 quality, this is offering fans to purchase music at a much more reasonable price than what larger retailers are selling music for. Comeandlive.com, is the newest site to evolve, where they allow you to download any artist on their roster for free and then if you enjoy the album, you can purchase different limited edition versions that come with rare sweatshirts, limited pressings of the record and other material that cannot be pirated. (Check this site out, they are a christian label that has an amazing roster, not all bands preach to you and all music is free. If you do purchase they donate their funds to charitable organizations. Give it a whirl, I've found some great artists here, especially Showbread)
It seems like the only people that are really worried about piracy are the larger major labels, who refuse to adapt to the techniques smaller labels are using. These smaller labels are making music more accessible and they are even starting to chart on the Billboard top 100, where as some major label release fail to even do that. Major labels need to realize that times are changing and they must adapt or else people will continue to steal their music, because they are offering their consumers nothing but an album, whereas these other sites offer rare goodies and other benefits if you purchase their albums.
Movie piracy is something that I think may begin to decline, now that Redbox has come about. It is nice to be able to rent a movie for a dollar instead of $4.99 at Family Video, and it is much more convenient. However, as society becomes more technologically savvy, people are going to find it easier to find free media online. The industry is going to have to adapt or else piracy is going to continue at a rate faster than the speed of light.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)