A Mobile World

“The key feature in the practice of mobile communication is connectivity rather than mobility.” (Castells, Pg. 304).  This statement is extremely true because the primary reason why people by cell phones is to be connected.  The mobility of cell phones does make it easier for us to be connected, but being connected is the most important factor.  House phones used to be our primary telephone communication and those were not focused around constant connection.  Those were simply based about getting in communication with people when necessary. Now, with cell phones we use communication beyond the limits of what is necessary because we feel the need to constantly be connected with everyone at every second.  Cell phones have also encouraged these connectivity methods by allowing people to access their emails, Facebook, and Twitter accounts all on their cell phones.

As the book mentions, the wireless communication redefines space.  The levels of privacy have changed due to convenient communication. The space of flows have changed to the point where there is a constant flow of information.  Both space and time are blurred into a new world where communication is constant and news flow never stops.

Wireless communication has also destroyed personal communication. “People build their own private space by simply ignoring others around them. (Castells, Pg. 306). When people are walking to class or on the streets, they are usually on their cell phones, staying in connection with the rest of the world. Meanwhile, they are oblivious to the people they pass or any human interactions that they could’ve encountered if they weren’t on their phones.

Wireless communication allows people to constantly be on the move.  There is no doubt that advancements in technology has increased the pace of the average daily life. In the past, people would go to work and come home after a long day to check their messages and maybe return a few phone calls.  Now, people have cell phones where they can constantly be contacted to and from work, as well as at work.  Cell phones can disturb the peace.  People often take vacations to avoid the life of work, yet now people bring their cell phones and can be contacted at any moment anywhere in the world. It is a valid question to ask, “do people control cell phones or do cell phones control people?”

Monopolizing Communication

Imagine a room full of transistors, hundreds, possibly even thousands, and new ones being added all the time. It would be an intimidating place to try and operate. But this is what the scene of a telephone operating company in a large city looked like during the 19th century and early 20th. In “The Telephone Takes Command”, Claude Fischer chronicles the telephones rocky beginnings and how the Bell Telephone Company had to originally manage their new business and new invention.

Although Alexander Graham Bell’s telephone invention was ultimately successful, it was not without its share of obstacles. Originally there were demonstrations held around the country by Bell and his associates for this novelty item, where they would have people in another town gather and they would speak or sing from it. He had to borrow telegraph wires sometimes for long-distance calls, and these would sometimes fail.

It was also a cumbersome instrument, originally the hardware was made of three boxes and a mix of wood, metal, and electrical components. Caller’s had to contact a switchboard operator whom had to then connect the call in the switchboard. But Bell and his associates had the savvy to patent the phone so they had sole rights to the invention and its modification. They were the only people who could license the instrument to companies and charge them their own set price.

What resulted from Bell’s company having a monopoly over the industry was that they did create for themselves a strong foothold in customer bases before their patent ran out, but still had encountered plenty of animosity from their customers for the high prices they set on their services. Many different charging rates had to be tested and applied and their industry continually fluctuated.

Also, the service was still restricted to government, military, and commercial enterprises mainly. Only the very wealthy could afford to have a telephone line many smaller communities did not even have lines available for their citizens. The general residential market and even business market outside of major centers were essentially shut out of the industry for many years.

The growth of the telephone grew quickly in its early years, and only slowed later due to the lag in newer technology for the instrument and predatory monopoly prices, but the telephone was clearly such a decisive mover in the advancment of communication that it inevitably drove the telegraph out of use and into obscurity. Although the telegraph companies like Western Union did adapt and survive, the telephone overlapped the telegraph in its usefulness and there was no question that the former technology would wither as the latter gained strength.

 

Commerce and Communication in Early Denver

Although there is a lack of historical information regarding telegraphy in Denver, it does seem that there is a strong connection between the growth of the railroads here and the telegraph stations. In the 1850’s -60’s Colorado was facing hard times and needed revitalization after the gold and solver mining rushes. Governor John Evans had even admitted the need for new commerce by saying, “Colorado without railroads is compartively worthless”. Denver had to compete with other neighboring cities such as Golden for enough money to pay for a railroad between Cheyenne and Denver. Denver’s efforts succeeded and the Denver Pacific Railway and Telegraph Company was created. Denver became the state’s hub and railroad lines were then traversed and connected across the state. Therefore I then assume telegraph stations and lines were then traced alongside many of the railways that connected the state like the one that was located at the base of the Alpine Tunnel. The success of bringing the railroads to Denver coincided with bringing in new technology like the telegraph to create the ability to communicate between these railway bases quickly. It was no accident that these two huge growths helped Denver become the central city and capital in the state of Colorado.

The Future of Media (Revised)

After reading “How Media Became New,” by Lev Manovich, I really started reflecting on how media has transformed drastically throughout the years. The writing itself was more comparing the similarities between the evolution of the computer and the evolution of cinematography that were occurring at simultaneous times. It seemed like the two practically had a connection, as soon as one had a breakthrough in the industry the other had a very similar breakthrough. The thing that amazed me most and got me thinking and reflecting on was how far we have come since the creation of communication and media. Since the cave drawings, stick notches, and rock counters, life, media, and society has changed drastically. Think about how every advancement and evolution step since the beginning of media has led to where we are at today with the internet and social media. The steps have been very apparent and noticeable but just thinking about that distance is incredible. Have we hit our peak? How much farther will we be able to go? These are questions that really only time will be able to answer. Cinematography and the computer had major breakthroughs within mere decades, what will our world and the world of media look like in that same time? Just as cinematography and the computer have evolved into the smooth artistic forms of media they are today, I predict the world of media that we live in today will be drastically different in the next twenty to thirty years.
One key aspect that Manovich talked about was the word cinematography and its correlation to storing data. As Manovich states, “If we believe the word cinematograph, which means ‘writing movement,’ the essence of cinema is recording and storing visible data in a material form.” He then goes on to say, “This cinematic apparatus is similar to a computer in one key aspect: A computer’s program and data also have to be stored in some medium.” This is where cinematography can be comparable to computers. As they continued to evolve and develop with each other there came the need for the ability to store more and more amounts of data. The film industry figured out a way to do this by utilizing a camera and thus developed the term cinematography, the art of recording and storing movement. Just as the film industry found a way to store data, computers did the same. The earliest forms of computers even resembled cameras and projectors because they were using the same kind of technology and applying it to computing and storing information. The film industry and the computer industry fed off of each other in order for both industries to really take off in the 1890’s and early 1900’s. Both had the same goal of recording and storing information, and the computer even used film technology to accomplish this goal.

The Future of Media

After reading “How Media Became New,” by Lev Manovich, I really started reflecting on how media has transformed drastically throughout the years. The writing itself was more comparing the similarities between the evolution of the computer and the evolution of cinematography that were occurring at simultaneous times. It seemed like the two practically had a connection, as soon as one had a breakthrough in the industry the other had a very similar breakthrough. The thing that amazed me most and got me thinking and reflecting on was how far we have come since the creation of communication and media. Since the cave drawings, stick notches, and rock counters, life, media, and society has changed drastically. Think about how every advancement and evolution step since the beginning of media has led to where we are at today with the internet and social media. The steps have been very apparent and noticeable but just thinking about that distance is incredible. Have we hit our peak? How much farther will we be able to go? These are questions that really only time will be able to answer. Cinematography and the computer had major breakthroughs within mere decades, what will our world and the world of media look like in that same time? Just as cinematography and the computer have evolved into the smooth artistic forms of media they are today, I predict the world of media that we live in today will be drastically different in the next twenty to thirty years.

How Media Becomes New

“How Media Became New” by Lev Manovich outlines how media and computing have intertwined throughout history. It is basically the (very slow) transition from media to new media. By new media, I means things like moving images and sounds are possible. It was strange to think about the idea of new media being such a hugely profound development in  history, considering all the possibilities of today. The computer can now do things unimaginable in the 19^th and 20^th century.

 

In 1833, Babbage begin work on a machine called the “analytical Engine”. It was basically like the worlds’ most basic computer. It let people enter in date and information using punch cards, the Engine then saved that information, and performed operations. The results then printed out. In 1839, Daguerre developed a new process called the daguerreotype, which was a machine that took pictures. In the 1890s, the Lumiere brothers presented their camera/projection “hybrid” to the world. People were fascinated with the  way reality was presented on a screen for them to watch and enjoy. They used it to “soothe” themselves from “dense information environment  outside the theater”. Also in the 1890s, computer developed a lot. The tabulator created by Hollerith was used in the 1890 census to collect information. These tabulators were used in many different mediums.

 

I’m still a bit confused as to how we got from all of the above to today, considering the immense possibilities in both movie/music making as well as daily life. But I think it gives a good beginning of the huge transition. Things like computers and media were clearly less prominent in those days so the developments done were groundbreaking. I’m just still a bit lost on how we got from the first camera ever, which I’m sure was pretty primitive, to today where people Skype for work from across  the globe on their WiFi enabled Mac Books in coffee shops.

Television Transforms the News

Television has transformed the news ever since the medium was created.  Radio gave the news its voice but television has restored the news’ face.  The news we see on television is a person telling the audience what has happened, which seems like an old way of communicating information.  The story behind this news is pretty complex.  The news we see on T.V. is moving pictures being transformed in and out of electronic signals using a rotating disk with spiral perforations (Stephens 245-246).  This form of communication had been introduced in the 1920’s but then really perfected by radio networks later on.  In 1941 CBS was now broadcasting two newscasts a day (Stephens 246).  An initial problem producers ran into was how to fill the screen.  This included the person on the screen and his role and what visuals would be used to portray news in general.

The development of the television had to be put on hold due to the occurrence of the Second World War.  In 1949 it picked up again with Kraft Television Theater and Howdy Doody.  CBS TV now had anchor Douglas Edwards while NBC News had John Cameron Swayze.  The news in this era consisted of “talking heads” giving the world the news.  This began to transform in the fifties when CBS and NBC began producing their own film reports.  Anchors began to go out of studio for stories while eyewitness narration was now provided.  This was when the real power of the medium proved to be.  The power came to reality in the sixties when Kennedy defeated Nixon on television, Lee Harvey Oswald was shot on television, protesters were seen on camera, and everything could now be seen on camera.  Television began to attract success and that of new audiences with the news much like mediums before it.  Once T.V.s became affordable the news was now made available to millions across the nation to a diverse audience.  We live in a world of mediated reality and the television has extended our access to news.  With this, it has made us more reliable on television news and less on us to tell our own news.  We borrow facts and steal opinions, but newsgathering has been taken to all whole different level with the television (Stephens).

history of TV in Denver

Broadcast TV in Denver began around the 1950’s with Channel 7 and Channel 4. One of the first broadcasts ever made was the recording of a court room and the very popular late night show “The Dick Lewis Late Show”. The Channel 7 also won an award when it first started that gave it 8 of the top 10 syndicated shows. Next, during the 1960’s, Fred and Fea, became two of the most popular children TV personalities, and had several time slots throughout the week. These two were on the air for 15 years and retired in 1977. Some other historic events in the 60’s, was the first satellite TV broadcast in 1962 and shortly after that, one of the first world wide satellite Tv interviews.The interview featured President Dwight Eisenhower in the Channel 7 studio, linked by satellite to Winston Churchill in England. There have also been several celebrities who have visited the Channel 7 studio in Denver throughout its existence. Some of them include, Martin Luther King Jr., Jackie Robinson, Muhammad Ali, Otto Preminger, Raymond Burr, Johnny Miller and Jackie Gleason. They have also won several awards throughout the years and are a very well honored television station.

TV in the Net Age

I really enjoyed this article mainly because it focused on the dynamics of the certain different TV watching habits of different age groups and genders. I found it really interesting that there are actually certain types of TV watchers depending on the shows they watch, the times of day they watch and their style of watching. I found myself relating to this article a a lot because it used American Idol as the main focus. When I was in high school my sister, mom and I used to watch American Idol religiously every week. When the article explained the different roles that each family member usually has when watching this show, I thought it was very accurate. Myself, being the youngest, would always be the first to turn it on and call the rest of the family to the room. My sister would always be the one coming in and out of the room not paying as much attention, and like the book said, my mom was always the one voting in the end. This not only brought us together every week but it was something we could all relate to, discuss, and was an outlet in our lives that we were all very familiar with.

I also liked this article because it explained how television combines all different types of media outlets together. With the example of American Idol again, they use the TV show as a form of advertisement by using product placement. And also it is a way of attracting people to the net by drawing their attention into the contestants and leaving them wanting to know more. I think this is very true because I have defiantly found myself watching reality TV and immediately after the episode going on the internet and looking for more information about contestants or more information about the show. They also use these contestants on news channels or talk shows which attracts these same demographics of people to a wide variety of television. I think these strategies of TV is what attracts so many people to this diverse area of media.

From Silent to Sound

The article I read titled, “Movies Talk” was an interesting interpretation of how the film industry was changed when sound was included in movies. The author of the article, Scott Eyman, provided a great analysis of how sound changed movies.  He first talked of how sound, “Standardized movies, made them less malleable, less open to individual interpretation. Allusion and metaphor were the bedrocks of the silent medium, but dialogue literalized every moment, converted it from subjective to objective.” After I read this passage, I took away two interpretations.  One is that silent films did serve a valuable artistic quality in regards to letting its viewers interpret the film in their own way.  This is an important characteristic of all artistic expressions because just as if you were looking at a painting and interpreting it from your own perspective, viewers of silents movies were interpreting the movies in a similar fashion.  A second interpretation that I drew from this passage is that sound truly brought a new aspect of interpretation to the viewers of films. The scenes that viewers were seeing with sound for the first time gave them a chance to both hear a literal scene with the characters speaking and then they have the opportunity to individually interpret those scenes. Another interesting quote that I found in the article read: “Talkies were not an evolution; as a result, careers were extinguished.  Major directors were ruined, great stars plummeted.”  The elimination of silent films did cause people to loose jobs because the creation of movies with sound.  Silent films have been eliminated and thus a form of artistic expression has been eliminated, which is interesting to think about.  In result of sound films being established it eventually led to silent films being eliminated, leaving many in that industry out of a job.  The creation of movies with sound is an interesting medium progression to think about because it had such an effect on how people watch and think about movies.