I do enjoy myself a good quality movie. But as my interests in cinema continue to grow, so too does the movie industry. Foreign films are becoming more popular and along with this, so too are the cultural integrations into popular film. This is referred to as transnational film which is creating a greater shift in the global film culture. According to Schaeffer and Karen (2010), the mixture of both global and local elements are utilised to appeal to varying audiences tastes and trends. The development of transnationalism can be linked with significant events such as the end of wars, the development of technology and globalisation. Of course the development of technology is in my opinion the largest contributing factor toward the increase in popularity of foreign films. Without this technology, we would not be able to easily access movies from half way around the globe at a click of a button. We are all so switched on and more aware of what is happening globally and especially in the movie industry.
An example I like to use when referring to hybridity within transnational film, is the film of Avatar directed by David Cameron exemplifies the relation of the characters within the film to Hindu gods through their blue coloured skin, surroundings and costuming. Cameron’s utilisation of other cultures lets him tell a story and in my opinion should not be thought of as theft but rather the use of other cultural aspects to illustrate a story.
As Bollywood films become increasingly popular, so too does the incorporation of cultural aspects of Indians. This is illustrated within choreography in well-known dance television shows, advertisements and even figure skating routines. The way Indian culture is portrayed tends to be through costuming and music depicting a strong connection with that particular culture. It enables the audience to experience a little bit of the strong culture and associate with it as a new and exciting way of approaching performances and advertisements.
In today’s society we are receiving more options for things that previously would have been limited to us. Could you see your grandparents growing up watching Bollywood or Asian films? Possibilities today are endless with transnational film and the way in which we are exposed to more cultures which I think creates greater awareness and acceptance of other cultures.
Karan, K and Schaefer, DJ (2010) ‘Problematizing Chindia: Hybridity and Bollywoodization of popular Indian cinema in global film flows’ Global Media and Communication Vol 6: 3, pp. 309-316
Whether we like to admit it or not, globalisation is an inevitable process occurring throughout the developed and developing countries of the world. Whether you’re all for it or utterly against it, it is vital to the development of the world. It has allowed us to become more connected and has given us the ability to choose ‘where we are from’. The main contributing factor of the development of globalisation is technology. It enables us to be informed and communicate with people all over the world creating opportunities and experiences previously uncommon or difficult to achieve.
Globalisation however, can be seen from contrasting views of dystopian and utopian ideals. The utopian aspect of globalisation can also be addressed by Marshall McLuhan’s term of the “Global Village” which was introduced to portray the idea that globalisation is able to bring people together no matter where they are in the world allowing communication within the ‘global village’ Ultimately it changes how we interact with one another. It allows us to communicate globally. On the other hand, a dystopian view is evident. Globalisation especially through the media can affect political and social norms through representations and portrayals politically, economically and socially.
Imagine a life without globalisation though. You wouldn’t be able to walk down the street and be offered an array of world cuisines, or be exposed to other cultural film industries such as Bollywood or get the latest gadget produced in Europe. We wouldn’t be able to connect throughout the world or be exposed to other cultures. Where would we be without globalisation?
At the start of this task, I’ll be honest; I hated it and didn’t really see much point for it. But looking back, it really did teach me a lot. It enabled me to delve deeper into the issues and actually think about them and put them into my own words. I know my blog is definitely not the best but I tried so hard to make it half as good as the fantastic ones I’ve been reading. It has taught me a lot about converging media and the increasingly important role that media and technology have on all our lives even if we don’t realise it.
Here’s a look at my top 3 blog posts.
1. Mix it, Match it
I really enjoyed this topic because the remix culture is one that I never would have thought was a topic for discussion. Music is a large part of my life and it was interesting to learn about the idea of collaborations and I would never have thought it would have much of an association with the media. Boy how I was wrong.
2. CTRL + C
I knew copyright was always a major issue but I never knew to what extent. Blogging about this issue enabled me to actually grasp the impact it has on the media and how converging media can impact it.
This one for me was an interesting topic. Transmedia storytelling was always a major influence growing up but I didn’t actually know there was a name for it! The way in which fiction can get placed into so many varying types of media such as games, magazines and theme parks is everywhere including Harry Potter and Tomb Raider. I struggled at the start of this topic, but the more I learnt, the more I enjoyed it.
Willa is over and out.
The topic of women is always a shaky one whether it be online or not. There are always going to be issues of misogyny and inequality between men and women. Over the past 100 years, women have fought for their rights and equality and are still doing so to this day. Online is another story though. With the introduction and popularity of opinion blogs and social media such as Facebook and twitter, it has become an increasingly hot topic. Laurie Penny, writer for the Guardian explains that “the net, however, makes it easier for boys in lonely bedrooms to become bullies.” (Thorpe, Rodgers 2011) This statement portrays the idea that the internet is like an invisibility cloak. You can say what you want and not have to face up to the females you are insulting.
An example of the impact trolls can have on targeting women is outlined in the Charlotte Dawson case. She came under extreme scrutiny online via Twitter as males trolled and tormented her online with abusive tweets that were able to hide behind their keyboards and not feel the effect of it. One of her tormentors 20 year-old Jordan McGuire explains when asked how he felt being yelled expletives at that “they’re just things I say. They’re things that I say on Twitter and Twitter isn’t real life.” This comment displays the misconception of online trolling and the issue of misogyny.
Misogyny is still a major concern online with the access of majority of the population to internet and technology. It furthers on from cyber bullying and can have severe consequences. But will it improve or get worse in the future?
Clicktivism illustrates the idea of online activism; becoming involved virtually. Our generation sees it as participation. But is it really doing anything?
The increase in participation online and the development of technology such as smartphones allows everyone to have access to awareness of issues globally and politically. Henry Jenkins argues that “the digital age has opened a new era of activism that offers the next generation new awareness into broader political participation” (Jenkins, 2012). His statement is right on the money. Even for me, an 18 year old fresh out of school, I have learnt a lot, maybe all my information about global issues including politics from the internet and videos. Events such as public protests and revolts are able to be strewn across the internet in minutes after they occur allowing the world to become more involved in sharing information.
For me, the Kony 2012 video made a significant impact on me as it did with so many others around the world. It allowed us to get involved and empowered us to think that we can make a difference in the world, even if it is just a click. But are we really making any real difference? Sure it enables us to have a voice but are we really helping out the cause? I’m not 100% sold on clicktivism or online activism but I do think it allows us to become more aware of global and national issues.
“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” (Henry Jenkins)
The key word I identify in this definition is ‘entertainment’. The purpose of transforming mediums for storytelling is to entertain the consumers. In a nutshell, transmedia is about one story conveyed on a variety of channels or mediums. Audiences now have more opportunities to delve deeper into popular narratives. This can be seen globally within the English speaking countries of the UK, the US and Australia with variations in television shows, music, novels and websites alike.
For example, the fictional series of Harry Potter by J.K Rowling began as a book series. Gaining popularity meant transforming this medium for the entertainment of the audience. Then came the movies which have seen over $7 billion roll in in box offices worldwide. After this, EA Games introduced video game adaptations of the films with the last being released in 2011. We have seen PlayStation and Xbox games as well as theme parks and comic books. These added narratives have allowed audiences to probe further into the mysterious, fictional world of wizards and witchcraft which adds onto the narrative energizing the franchise further. All this enhances consumer involvement and engagement.
Jenkins, H. 2007, Transmedia Storytelling 101, Confessions of an Aca-Fan, weblog post, 22 March, 25th April 2013, http://henryjenkins.org/2007/03/transmedia_storytelling_101.html.
The Australian media landscape consists of extremely concentrated patterns of ownership. This involves the likes of Gina Rinehart, Kerry Stokes and Bruce Gordon of who impact the entire Australian population and the way we interpret information presented to us. This power enables these select few to shape what society sees as normal and determines what society’s expectations are. Ultimately, media ownership has persuasion over our ideologies and has the potential to shift how we perceive the world.
These days media is not just an avenue for getting the news. It presents the endless possibilities accessible to us and the way in which they can shape our perceptions on certain topics. This can be seen through the portrayal of large political figures who can be portrayed as well as the media decides. This has a major impact on the political system and outcomes of Australia providing a bias view in political campaigns.
Throughout my day, I’m exposed to media owned by the likes of Gina Rinehart, Kerry Stokes and Bruce Gordon. These are three individuals who have the power to change my ideas. Studying this topic has scared me to the fact that single people can change my views in an instant. Gina Rinehart for example has limited the negative exposure to mining limiting our understanding of the big issues and impacts of mining in Australia. This limitation serves as a perfect example of the impact an individual’s bias view can have which ultimately determines our views on important issues in Australia. The concentration of media ownership has proved a major concern due to its single-sided views and furthermore the power and influence it has on the people of Australia.
Time Magazine. A highly influential magazine read and viewed by millions worldwide. So when Time decided to put a controversial image on the front of their magazine, it was sure to cause debate and argument about the content. This was seen through the May 2012 cover of a mother breast-feeding her 3 year old son with the title, “Are you Mom enough?” in bold red letters. Its purpose was to explore the topic of “attachment parenting” which according to Dr Bill Sears (2012) is a growing trend in today’s society.
But why was it so controversial? The denotation is simply what the picture literally presents. The picture sees Jamie Lynne Grummet, 26, breast feeding her three year old son which in today’s society isn’t necessarily looked highly upon.
Furthering on from this, the image connotes a specific idea of breast-feeding and motherhood which continues to be a tender topic in today’s society in many cultures. It questions whether “You are mom enough” and presents an extreme idea of motherhood and the so called “correct way” to up bring your child.
Many turned to social media especially twitter to voice their opinions on the cover. Most were women and in particular, new mothers. Alyssa Milano, a well-known actress and mother herself took to twitter to describe her disgust with the cover.
Overall the cover sparked an incredible amount of debate about the exploitive nature of the cover and the impact that it had on the views of “attachment parenting” and mothers world-wide.
Braiker, B 2012, Time breastfeeding cover ignites debate around ‘attachment parenting’, Guardian 10 May, viewed 7 April, http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/may/10/time-magazine-breastfeeding