Good point Johan.
The more you decentralize media the more you decentralize it's traditional
roles. With for example "mob-logs" you make every mobile phone user a
publisher, author, consumer, and distributor. This is truly empowering.
The effect on the media landscape and how people use media will not be
radical at all. As Ellen Seiter has pointed out, media seems to be a way of
articulating and expressing existing social patterns rather than changing
them in a radical way.
This development will empower users and give them alternative ways to get
information into their mobile phones. Hopefully operators will support this
positive development and surely they could make money on it.
New media technology is not a revolution, it is an evolution.
/Mattias
At 09:55 2003-02-18 +0100, you wrote:
>I agree with Erik, here's why:
>
>If you drive down the cost and trouble of instant publication of news,
>more people will be able to publish things that they think are
>newsworthy. Look at Bloggs for example. Now think mobile bloggs with
>photos.
>
>If you drive down the cost and trouble of publishing a photo you also
>drive down the number of viewers that you think needs to see it in order
>for you to go through the trouble of doing it. Therefor, more photos
>from more events will be published since there indeed is more relevant
>news.=20
>
>And why hasn't this hit radio you ask. Well everyone can't start a radio
>station but everyone can have a Blogg.
>
>/Johan
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net=20
> > [mailto:keitai-l-bounce@appelsiini.net] On Behalf Of Dirk R=F6sler
> > Sent: den 18 februari 2003 09:30
> > To: keitai-l@appelsiini.net
> > Subject: (keitai-l) Re: gimmick, but....
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> >=20
> > As nice and empowering your theory sounds, in my opinion=20
> > there are some=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > flaws in it making it wishful thinking:
> >=20
> > First it is not the increased capability of capture which=20
> > makes the=3D20 event. The event is there first, then ensues its =
>capture.
> >=20
> > Then secondly the number of newsworthy (admittedly, this term=20
> > depends=3D20 on one's definition) events is finite. There will=20
> > not be more relevant=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > news just because there's more people out there ready to=20
> > capture it.=3D20 You may say that in turn more events will be=20
> > reported, which leads to=3D20 point three.
> >=20
> > Thirdly not all events deserve the capture, simply because=20
> > there is a=3D20 natural upper bound on the demand of news or=20
> > reporting. The audience=3D20 will stick to what's relevant,=20
> > thereby limiting what is put into the=3D20 system and standard=20
> > editing takes place. Editing has its own problem:=3D20 say a=20
> > camera takes a picture, what's next? Forward to 5 news =
>agencies,=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > ten television stations and 20 newspapers?
> >=20
> > In plain English: we may be technically able to see plenty of=20
> > cute=3D20 pictures of babies, cats etc, but nobody has an=20
> > interest in these=3D20 trivial things. We will see events that=20
> > have been events before, but=3D20 better documented because=20
> > there is greater probability that someone is=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > taking a picture, or pictures from different angles etc. Also=20
> > useful=3D20 for police or accident investigators.
> >=20
> > There is however a greater potential for niche news, for=20
> > people with a=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > particular interest, but not within the mainstream. But the=20
> > bottom line=3D20=3D
> >=20
> > is that more cameras doesn't mean more or better news.
> >=20
> > Dirk
> >=20
> >=20
> > On Tuesday, Feb 18, 2003, at 15:16 Asia/Tokyo, Erik H=3DF6rnfeldt =
>wrote:
> >=20
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Its not an gimmick. Mobiles with cameras ill soon start to have a=20
> > > major impact on all other media. Think 11/9 with live video feeds=20
> > > coming from most of the people trapped in the buring towers. Thinmk=20
> > > million and million of newsteams and every event, big or small,=20
> > > covered more or less live.
> > >
> > > Think telecom turning into telecam.
> > >
> > > Erik H
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On 17 Feb 2003 at 21:06, Nick May wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2765549.stm
> > >>
> > >> A bit gimmicky, but interesting to see that even aunty beeb is=20
> > >> prepared to use phone-cams.
> > >>
> > >> Nick
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> This mail was sent to address erik@hornfeldt.se
> > >> Need archives? How to unsubscribe? =3D
> > http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > > "Be, know, do!"
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > Erik H=3D3DF6rnfeldt <all the usual disclaimers apply>
> > > mobile +46 733 55 7404, mobile video +46 35 33 7404
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > This mail was sent to address d.rosler@jens.co.jp
> > > Need archives? How to unsubscribe?=20
> > http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/
> > >
> >=20
> >=20
> > This mail was sent to=20
> > address johan@doberman.se
> > Need archives? How to unsubscribe?=20
> > http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/=20
> >=20
> >=20
>
>
>This mail was sent to address mattias.kohlmark@hyperisland.se
>Need archives? How to unsubscribe? http://www.appelsiini.net/keitai-l/
Received on Tue Feb 18 11:31:59 2003