Gordon, J. (2007). The mobile phone and the public sphere: mobile phone usage in three critical situations. Convergence 13(3), 307-319.
The Gordon article looks at the influence of the mobile phone on the public sphere – especially focusing on it affects on news agendas, gatekeepers and definers.
· There is a growing sense of immediacy and community supplied to users of internet enabled mobile devices. The users consume and create online content by allowing them to document real-time events, and communicate within their community free of the constraints of time and space.
· This citizen created news content is then remediated and filtered by mainstream news for use by mainstream news services. To me this much like the platforms as discussed in last week’s lecture where the traditional news outlets are providing a platform for user created content.
· This though indicates to me that mainstream media are still setting the news agenda and gatekeeping much of the original news content outside of some examples such as Salam Pax.
· Mobile phone use can circumvent censorship and news blackouts as seen in the recent political conflicts in Middle East where mobile internet and social networking was highlighted as tools used in the organisation of protest rallies, and also a tool for documenting events at these rallies.
· Gordon uses three examples of relatively recent major news events – SARS (2003), South East Asian Tsunami (2004) and the London Bombings (2005). These are all before the advent of web2.0 and also the popularization of social networking so the results found might be more pronounced into day’s highly networked society.
· SARS:
§ During the SARS outbreak in china people in the affected areas used mobile phones to share information about the outbreak that was being withheld by official government channels denying them live update information. Thus ordinary people had the power to publish and distribute information via networked mobile devices.
§ The incident in Hong Kong where a teenager mocked up SARS alert is an example of the ease at which an individual can publish and distribute information, and why it is important for the audience to assess online publications for authenticity so they ensure they are consuming correct information
§ Both of these examples show how the new online publishing tools can be seen as a threat to established power structures unable to contain the flow of information and news through traditional gatekeeping methods.
· S.E. ASIAN TSUNAMI:
§ Mobile phones used to record and distribute video and images and communications within affected areas.
§ The real-time images taken of the Tsunami event in south east Asia in 2004 by citizen journalists using mobile devices would have been almost impossible for a traditional news organisation to capture unless the happened to be in the disaster area at the time.
§ Mainstream media them remediate and gate keep the this information for use in its publications
§ Disaster response capable on a global scale via communications networks
· LONDON BOMBINGS:
§ Images taken via mobile devices were taken only moments after the bombings and distributed – some were too graphic for regular news
§ Mainstream media used eye witness accounts in conjunction with images and video from citizen journalism and then edited the two together to form a filtered news story that otherwise would have to been possible to give a fuller picture of the event through the combination of information – this is a version of the “wisdom of crowds” where information from several sources painted a fuller picture than anyone individual ever could.
§ This information was also used by investigators into the event further broadening the use of such information and broadening the knowledge base.
· Mobile technologies can contribute to the public sphere, and citizen journalism where:
§ The ruling power hegemony allows them to do so
§ Mass public communication systems have been put in place and implemented effectively
§ Sudden unexpected events occur and only citizen journalist will be in place to document them
· In reflection, media content created and distributed by mobile devices free of the gatekeeping and filtering found in the mainstream media allowing for a more transparent accurate news cycle.
They can also be subject to government restrictions, and technological restrictions, where mobile content is either monitored or blocked by, or networks may be redirected or overloaded when major events happen and they are required for the management of an emergency response.
The paper touched on the comparisons on the gatekeeping of mobile content when it discussed the filtering of citizen created images that were too graphic – but can still be found on unfiltered news sites such as blogs.
Finally I think the information gathered from these sources is contributing to the overall reporting of events by mainstream media, as mentioned earlier, where they use citizen created content to form a filtered news story that otherwise would have to been possible to give a full picture of the event through this information which allows for a version of the “wisdom of crowds” where information from several sources allow for a greater sum of knowledge than anyone individual ever could present.
The Gordon article looks at the influence of the mobile phone on the public sphere – especially focusing on it affects on news agendas, gatekeepers and definers.
· There is a growing sense of immediacy and community supplied to users of internet enabled mobile devices. The users consume and create online content by allowing them to document real-time events, and communicate within their community free of the constraints of time and space.
· This citizen created news content is then remediated and filtered by mainstream news for use by mainstream news services. To me this much like the platforms as discussed in last week’s lecture where the traditional news outlets are providing a platform for user created content.
· This though indicates to me that mainstream media are still setting the news agenda and gatekeeping much of the original news content outside of some examples such as Salam Pax.
· Mobile phone use can circumvent censorship and news blackouts as seen in the recent political conflicts in Middle East where mobile internet and social networking was highlighted as tools used in the organisation of protest rallies, and also a tool for documenting events at these rallies.
· Gordon uses three examples of relatively recent major news events – SARS (2003), South East Asian Tsunami (2004) and the London Bombings (2005). These are all before the advent of web2.0 and also the popularization of social networking so the results found might be more pronounced into day’s highly networked society.
· SARS:
§ During the SARS outbreak in china people in the affected areas used mobile phones to share information about the outbreak that was being withheld by official government channels denying them live update information. Thus ordinary people had the power to publish and distribute information via networked mobile devices.
§ The incident in Hong Kong where a teenager mocked up SARS alert is an example of the ease at which an individual can publish and distribute information, and why it is important for the audience to assess online publications for authenticity so they ensure they are consuming correct information
§ Both of these examples show how the new online publishing tools can be seen as a threat to established power structures unable to contain the flow of information and news through traditional gatekeeping methods.
· S.E. ASIAN TSUNAMI:
§ Mobile phones used to record and distribute video and images and communications within affected areas.
§ The real-time images taken of the Tsunami event in south east Asia in 2004 by citizen journalists using mobile devices would have been almost impossible for a traditional news organisation to capture unless the happened to be in the disaster area at the time.
§ Mainstream media them remediate and gate keep the this information for use in its publications
§ Disaster response capable on a global scale via communications networks
· LONDON BOMBINGS:
§ Images taken via mobile devices were taken only moments after the bombings and distributed – some were too graphic for regular news
§ Mainstream media used eye witness accounts in conjunction with images and video from citizen journalism and then edited the two together to form a filtered news story that otherwise would have to been possible to give a fuller picture of the event through the combination of information – this is a version of the “wisdom of crowds” where information from several sources painted a fuller picture than anyone individual ever could.
§ This information was also used by investigators into the event further broadening the use of such information and broadening the knowledge base.
· Mobile technologies can contribute to the public sphere, and citizen journalism where:
§ The ruling power hegemony allows them to do so
§ Mass public communication systems have been put in place and implemented effectively
§ Sudden unexpected events occur and only citizen journalist will be in place to document them
· In reflection, media content created and distributed by mobile devices free of the gatekeeping and filtering found in the mainstream media allowing for a more transparent accurate news cycle.
They can also be subject to government restrictions, and technological restrictions, where mobile content is either monitored or blocked by, or networks may be redirected or overloaded when major events happen and they are required for the management of an emergency response.
The paper touched on the comparisons on the gatekeeping of mobile content when it discussed the filtering of citizen created images that were too graphic – but can still be found on unfiltered news sites such as blogs.
Finally I think the information gathered from these sources is contributing to the overall reporting of events by mainstream media, as mentioned earlier, where they use citizen created content to form a filtered news story that otherwise would have to been possible to give a full picture of the event through this information which allows for a version of the “wisdom of crowds” where information from several sources allow for a greater sum of knowledge than anyone individual ever could present.