Ring, ring, why don't you give me a calllllllllll????

Not so long ago mobile phones were a commodity to be enjoyed only by the very rich or by those scummy scummy corporate douche bags. You know the kind of guys who would walk around in cheap suits, reeking of Davidoff Cool Water, yelling into their 5kg phones, telling people to "Sell! Sell! Sell!!", so everyone could see them. Ahh now you remember.........


Fast forward to the year 2010 and the mobile screen has become the most dominant screen of the 21st century, often defining a person’s social status. They are extensions of people's personalities, and are often customised according to the user’s individuality. They have become such an important part of our day to day life, that we constantly carry one around, and we have developed reliability on mobile phones as a source of communication. Walk into any public place, and the air is alive with the sounds of mobiles ringing, it is almost impossible to escape it.


The growing popularity of mobile phones, and their excessive use, means that users are often held ransom by their phones in the sense that they incur a social cost of being ‘switched on’ 24 hours 7 days a week. Mobile phones have replaced traditional forms of communication, and there are little to no boundaries of when and were a person can be reached. A person with a business may receive calls from customers outside business hours, an office worker may be called by their boss outside of working hours and asked and thus mobile phones can be seen as a nuisance to their owners.

It is worth noting that mobile phones are not just a device used for communication, advances in technology mean that mobile phones have evolved into cameras, radios, mini computers, mp3 players, video recorders, calculators....... The list is endless, as is our dependence on mobile phones. Mobile phones are seen more of a source of entertainment, whereby users can play video games and watch videos on YouTube, and so they are devices with which users may escape reality.


The latest edition in mobile phones is the 3G, encompassing phones such as the Apple iPhone, where users may surf the web and use social networking applications such as Facebook and Twitter, whereby users are able to record videos and take photos via their 3G phones and post them on the internet for all to see, opening up the door for the latest social cost privacy, and more specifically sexting. Sexting mostly effects teenage girls who send sexual pictures of themselves to others. It has become such a social cost because once an image has been sent there are not limits to the amount of times it can be resent to other individuals or even posted online for the public to see. Celebrities such as Miley Cyrus and Vanessa Hudgens, both of whom are stars of children’s movies, are examples of young teenage girls who have been stung by sexting.

Mobile phones connect indivuals to the world, empower people with a voice and allow people to communicate with one another. Our dependence on our mobiles often comes at a cost, however in this day and age it would be highly problematic not to have one.

YouTube: Political Friend or Foe??????

YouTube, a form of new new medium, is being used effectively by politicians as a ‘political tool’ to polarise public opinion and gain public support. Many politicians, such as Barrack Obama, have used YouTube to their advantage, riding it all the way to the White House. However, YouTube can be a double sided sword and there is also the danger of political figures being subjected to ridicule through satire and parody. Founded in February 2005, YouTube is the leader in online video. It allows visitors and members the ability to watch and share videos on its site, and it gives its users the ability to “broadcast” themselves to the world. Its open nature means that it is easy for anyone to join, a major factor which has lead to its success as a new new media phenomenon.

According to BBC news, YouTube attracted one billion hits a day, as of October last year, and according to Ryan Junee, product manager of YouTube, 1,728,000 minutes of material are posted on YouTube each day as of the 20th of May 2009. These are phenomenal figures, and just go to show the unbelievable reach which YouTube has. These types of figures explain why YouTube has become such a potent political tool in gaining public awareness and support, and their significance has changed the way in which American politics operates.

One of the biggest influences on the 2008 American election was a music video titled “I’ve got a crush on Obama”, which first aired on YouTube on June 2007, and in its first month it had been viewed an amazing 2.3 million times and today it has been viewed over 17 million times. While this was not a political video which was officially endorsed by the Obama party, it greatly influenced those under the age of 30 to vote for Obama and it is no coincidence that the majority of those who viewed this video were under the age of 30.

YouTube may also destroy a political parties credibility and derail their Presidential aspirations in seconds, ala the McCain Campaign and CBS evening news incident which occurred less than 2 months from the election date. This interview revealed cracks in the McCain Campaign and really questioned the credibility of its leaders, John McCain and Sarah Palin. The interview revealed how Palin and McCain had conflicting views and opinions, in particular drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. The interview portrayed Palin as a sort of loose cannon, who had personal beliefs which differed greatly from those of her party, such as contraception.

YouTube is used as an open tool of communication between voters and candidates, and the produsage nature of YouTube means that candidates must ensure that they present themselves in an appropriate manner. The site of Sarah Palin stumbling through an interviewers questions on CBS evening news haunted the McCain party and effectively killed of thier chances of winning the 2008 American election.

Who made who?

In today’s day and age, we are continuously seeing examples of media content being re-produced and re-distributed, and so it would be naïve to think that all media is original content. What does this mean? You see, thanks to the ever evolving advances in technology we are all able to manipulate media content and produce “intellectual content”, known simply as “Produsage”.

The interactive nature of the internet, means that anyone may partake in distributing the media, whether it be via applications such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and thus become “Produser”, a term coined by Dr. Axel Bruns to describe those who are actively involved in user-led content production.


Dr. Axel Bruns

Steve Dangle is a “produser” using the Internet, and more specifically YouTube, as a medium to produce and distribute content to subscribers of his channel. Dangle “produses” video blogs, or vlogs, whereby he reviews matches played by his favourite hockey team, the Toronto Maple Leafs. This is a perfect example of how easy it is to become a “produser”; Dangle produces vlogs by using existing media reports about the matches, and thus creating his own version of events to be viewed by his subscribers.

Practising “producing” can be profitable; people like Seth MacFarlane who produces the cartoon comedy Family Guy, have made a living re-producing existing media content and re-distributing it through TV as a medium, albeit with a comedic twist. Family Guy constantly recycles past media content and almost re-educates its audience on the happenings of the past.

More recently Seth MacFarlane used “producage” to re-enact Star Wars using his popular Family Guy characters. By doing this MacFarlane is almost re-introducing Star Wars to new fans of the franchise, who were too young to have even seen the original movies when they had come out, thus creating a new craze for Star Wars amongst another generation.

Produsage is not exclusive to animators and vloggers, it is a method which is commonly used by credible news stations such as Channel 7, who rely heavily on media content to report the news. Most viewers would think that all of the content found on the news is original content produced and distributed by the news team, but a large majority of the content is media content which the TV station redistributes.

Advances in technology mean that the public may take an active role in the produsage of news. For example applications such as Twitter and Facebook on mobile phones, provide people with the opportunity to report on events as they happen. They are forms of live coverage, with which anyone can follow and interact. TV stations unable to get reporters onto the scene of the incident, are able to report facts about the incident thanks to the content gained from the "produser".

Sex in Cyberspace

Cybersex, it’s a phenomenon which has taken the world by storm. If you have used the internet within the past 12months, chances are you have been exposed to it, or that you have even taken part in it. Naughty. Naughty. But what is it? Where did it come from? Why is it so controversial? And why do we love it? Let’s take a journey and see how cybersex has shaped the way society uses and views the internet.

Dr. Sheri Meyers, a relationship expert from the US, defines cyber sex as being when “you're going online and literally having sex, or getting titillated by interacting with another person or a group of people. Cybersex is where you are sharing your fantasies and where you're talking about your sex life. You might even be masturbating as you do it, or asking them what they're doing. With webcams, there's even the show-and-tell aspect to it all”.

There are misinformed preconceptions that those who partake in cybersex are nerds with acne who can’t get the real thing. That may be true for a minority of cybersexers (if that is a word), but such is the popularity of cybersex, that even those considered to be attractive are giving it a go. Engaging in cybersex is relatively easy and in most cases, participants may remain anonymous.

Another misconception is that the majority of people who partake in cybersex are male, and that cybersex is not particularly popular amongst females, but according to Marnie C. Ferree in her article titled “Women and the web: cyber sex activity and implications”, women are well represented in the world of cybersex, and are active in their participation of cybersex. Fernee explains that women may have grown fond of cybersex because of the secrecy and security it affords them, and so women are just as likely to participate in forms of cybersex as men.

Traditionally cybersex has been limited to use in chatrooms, webcam shows, and porn sites, but the evolutionary nature of the internet means that there are always new ways in which cyber sex can be adapted. Take Second Life for example. Second Life is a MUD (Multi User Domain) whereby individuals may create an avatar in a cyber world, and if they choose, have sex with other people’s avatars. It can be argued that Cybersex’s popularity in Second Life is largely due to man’s quest for perfection; as the majority of people’s avatars in Second Life are a reflection of their fantasies. The majority of female avatars in Second Life, are portrayed as being slim, big breasted, with full lips, full body tan, revealing clothing and oozing with sex appeal. It’s not hard to see why sex is firmly entrenched in the fabric of Second Life. The majority of these avatars in no way directly reflect their owner’s appearance, but are tools for sexual interaction. For a minority, the profile of a Second Life user is that of someone who has next to zero social skills and is someone who is very insecure abut themselves, and so they create an avatar to live through. They create what they wish they were, and for most of these people the only sexual interaction they have is through Second Life.

Cybersex has its protractors, and there are those who feel that internet porn is a form of substance abuse and that those who regularly partake in cyber sex are addicts. Mary Anne Layden, co-director of the Sexual Trauma and Psychopathology Program at the University of Pennsylvania's Center for Cognitive Therapy, has likened porn addiction to that of cocaine, stating that “pornography addicts have a more difficult time recovering from their addiction than cocaine addicts, since coke users can get the drug out of their system, but pornographic images stay in the brain forever”. According to this, the ramifications for those with addictive personalities, who enjoy cybersex, could prove to be detrimental to their mental health and any future relationships they may have with “real” people.

Finally, if you are experiencing an addiction to porn, then why not take the aptly named “Cybersex Addiction Test” on the Healthy Place website, http://www.healthyplace.com/psychological-tests/cybersex-addiction-test/, and get yourself checked out before the effects of cybersex and porn addiction catch up to you!!!!!

Second Life is not a game.......

“People in virtual worlds build things, use them, sell them, trade them and discuss them. When another person confirms what I am seeing, places value on it, spends time working to pay for it, buys it, keeps it, uses it, talks about it, gets emotional about it, and then sells it – this tells me there is something real happening. The suspension of disbelief has become a grounding of belief”

Meadows (2008:51)

Teddy Roosevelt famously proclaimed that “if you build it, they will come” and it is a statement that still holds true to this very day. It is a statement which can be related to the growth in popularity experienced by virtual worlds, such as Second Life, which have exploded onto the internet. These virtual worlds have polarised the public’s opinion, by blurring the fine line which separates fantasy and reality, and they are set to have a big impact on society as a whole.

Second Life claims to have a community consisting of around 18 million accounts as of January 2010, however of the 18 million accounts, only 750,000 members of Social Life actually use their account on a regular basis. As its name suggests, Second Life allows its users to live a “second life” in a cyber community, whereby they are given the ability to customise their surroundings, as well as themselves. Users are able to buy and sell property, build houses, start businesses, buy and sell cars, clothes and many more accessories. In many ways, Second Life can be seen to directly mirror life offline.

Second Life allows users to express their individuality. It is a place where society’s “outcasts”, can congregate and be judged from the inside-out, and not the outside-in. It gives users the confidence to shed their skin and be who, and what, they want to be. Users find solace in Second Life, and the refuge it provides for those who have become frustrated with their mortal limitations. It is more fantasy than reality, which is why its validity has come into question, but for so many of it’s users it is as real as it gets.

"Users are able to shed their skin......"

Although it is a fantasy world, events which take place within Second Life have ability to create very real implications for users in their “off-line” lives. Take for example what happened to avid Second Life users David Pollard and Amy Taylor who both met and later married on Second Life. Yes that’s right, Dave and Amy were so into Second Life, that they chose to hold their wedding ceremony and reception in Second Life rather than the “real” world.





Things took a nasty turn when Amy discovered that Dave’s avatar was having sex with another person on Second Life. Amy then hired a private eye in second life to track Dave’s every move in the cyber community, and sure enough he was caught cheating a second time, but this time with a cyber prostitute. This was all too much for Amy, who swiftly asked for a divorce from Dave, and has since met her new love on World of Warcraft.

It may sound ridiculous for two people to divorce over Second Life, but such is the importance that these cyber worlds hold within the mental fabric of users, that if it happens in Second Life it might as well be real. Users see these avatars as being extensions of themselves, to the extent that ripples in a pond, create giant waves in the ocean which is real life. Although Second Life is a cyber world which sells itself on being free of all man’s limitations, it cannot escape the basic human emotions which encompass us all. Second Life may be just a game for some, but for others it is a way of life.

Freedom!!

From the outset, the Australia First Party can be seen as a normal political party, fighting for the hearts and minds of nationalists in Australia. But look further and it quickly becomes apparent that this particular party is not like the others; they denounce multiculturalism, are against globalisation and immigration, and are constantly linked to groups such as the KKK and are seen to be a racist political group.


The name “Australia First” can be interpreted to be a catch cry for white supremacy, and more importantly, highlight the fact that Anglo-Saxons arrived in Australia “first”. Offcourse we all know that the Aboriginals arrived here first over 40,000 years ago, and so it is a great disrespect to our Indigenous people, that we consider the arrival of Captain Cook and the First Fleet in 1788 as having more significance. People like this, are more often than not, are of the opinion that they are the rightful owners of the land.


The AFP’s political ideologies revolve around the “reaffirmation” of an Australian identity, of achieving independence and gaining freedom. These sorts of statements, which seem innocent enough, can be interpreted in a number of ways. Take “freedom” for example; it may sound silly to say that Australians are not free. We live in a democratic society, enjoy freedom of speech and are “free”, and so we are not going to use the word "freedom" in the same context, as say someone like William Wallace would. But someone who supports the AFP may interpret “freedom” as being free from immigrants, free from globalisations, free from multiculturalism and the threats they pose to our national safety and identity.


William Wallace

And what of the “reaffirmation” an “Australian identity”? What is an “Australian identity”? For a lot of people around the world, the word “Australia” conjures images of Paul Hogan as Crocodile Dundee and a Steve Irwin pouncing on crocodiles; cultural icons which have helped introduce Australia to the world. But, can these icons be seen to represent all Australians? Can everyday Australian’s relate to such characters? The answer is no.

Steve Irwin

While a small minority may be able to relate to these stereotypes, multicultural Australia is too diverse to be segmented into one category, sharing one identity. That is what makes being Australia so great; it is an amalgamation of so many different cultures, and more importantly, it works. So why mess with it?


One way in which the AFP thinks it can manipulate our “identity” and control the influence that multiculturalism has in shaping it, is by putting a limit on immigration. The AFP gives the reason; “Immigration mistakes can be big long term mistakes. Immigration policy must take into account social cohesion, employment opportunities, urbanisation and environmental issues”. Through this, the AFP is appealing to the blue collar members of our society, and casting immigrants in a light, as being people who are coming into this country and taking jobs away from everyday Australians. As being a threat to society and our “freedom”. The AFP takes the same stance against globalisation.


Although the AFP are not as blatant, or as in your face, as some of their predecessors, they can be seen to advocate a “white” Australia policy through their stance on multiculturalism, globalisation and immigration. They represent a minority of people who believe that prior to the arrival of the First Fleet, that Australia was “terra nullius”, as can be seen from their name “Australia First”. But to quote an unlikely source :




“Well, you see, Aborigines don't own the land.They belong to it. It's like their mother. See those rocks? Been standing there for 600 million years. Still be there when you and I are gone. So arguing over who owns them is like two fleas arguing over who owns the dog they live on”


Mick Dundee