The drama of the paranoid computer still maintains its tension, though it no longer seems amazing; the beginning with the monkeys is still a fine piece of cinema, but those non-aerodynamic spaceships have long lain in the toybox of our now-grown children, reproduced in plastic (the spaceships, I believe, not our children); the final images are kitsch (a lot of pseudo-philosophical vagueness in which anyone can put the allegory he wants), and the rest is discographic, music and sleeves (p. 145).
“The Multiplication of the Media”. (1983)
Eco, U. (1986). Travels in hyperreality. (W. Weaver, Trans.). Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace & Company. (Original work published in 1983).
¶
Digital imaging is a discrete, unique medium which produces unbelievable, physically intangible images generated by creators whose identities are difficult to determine or prove, and whose ownership is impossible to legally protect. Digital images are not, and should not be treated as, the equivalent of photographs.
What are we to think? In a short 185 years, the human race has seen the advent of a fantastical way to capture still moments in time and has gone on to master its mysteries, deconstructing each facet and eventually applying it to different processes and techniques. With the mystery gone, we have begun to create our own drama around the photographic image.
In addressing the statement above, one must break it into its distinct pieces. First, what is the definition of ‘photograph’ and what differences do digital images embody in comparison? The Oxford American English Dictionary defines the word ‘photograph’ in these terms:
a picture made using a camera, in which an image is focused onto film or other light-sensitive material and then made visible and permanent by chemical treatment.
A digital image may very well be made using a camera, focusing an image onto a light-sensitive sensor…but after that the nature of a digital image strays from its photographic counterpart. Digital images will be made visible by an electronic process. Thus, if going by accepted definitions alone, a digital image is certainly not a photograph. We are, however, in the same general field.
By that I mean that both produce still pictures. As a photograph is related in form to a painting, and paintings are related in form to drawings, a digital image is the next link in an evolutionary chain of picture-making. ¶ Read More…
While I don’t believe that Amazon’s Cloud Drive is all that innovative or special or game-changing, the way they are handling the Big Four music labels very well could be. According to this story at Ars Technica, Amazon did no license negotiation with the Industry, opting instead to put up a logical defense that could be the beginnings of a major sea change in consumer media consumption.
“[W]e do not need a license to store music in Cloud Drive,” Griffin added in an e-mail to Ars. “The functionality of saving MP3s to Cloud Drive is the same as if a customer were to save their music to an external hard drive or even iTunes.”
Amazon is practically begging the RIAA and label legal counsels to break down their doors with lawsuits. However, I believe this act is what could be a major turning point for both major media creators and distributors, as well as for consumers.
If the Big Four were smart, they would work with Amazon, leave it alone for a few months, and more than likely see their sales rise. This is the next logical step in convenience purchasing for consumers. No longer do you have to download, toss into iTunes and sync the song with your player – now you can buy it and have it instantly available to stream, anywhere (well almost – there’s this whole issue of Cloud Player being desktop or Android-only). If that doesn’t stimulate impulse buys, then I don’t know what will.
But, as we’ve seen over the past nearly-a-decade, the Big Four are not smart. As @fienen noted earlier:
The music industry is like the only place that expects you to buy their product, but then they do everything to prevent use.
So this is Amazon’s big chance. If they get taken to court–and seriously, how could they not have been expecting to?–and get a good judge, this could be a pivotal moment in how we access media. I’m not getting my hopes up that it will be, but it will be interesting to see how things play out.
“It’s in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough. That it’s technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities, that yields us the result that makes our hearts sing.”
Steven P. Jobs, iPad 2 Event, 2nd March 2011
¶
The international media’s response to the Gifford assassination attempt is so telling. America is so self-serving and self-focused that we can’t see that to the rest of the globe our language looks like that of a small child pitching a temper tantrum.
“People in Holland as in the US are concerned about the tone of our debate, the sharper rhetoric, and especially since for the first time TV news anchors are following the Fox [News] style of figures like Bill O’Reilly,” says Peter van Os, a former Washington correspondent for De Groene Amsterdammer who writes on Dutch politics from The Hague. “The phrase ‘angry electorate’ is now used often here … and we are having debates about what Bill Clinton recently called ‘fact free’ news.”
Europeans have paid attention to numerous stories on former Alaska governor Sarah Palin and her pro-tea party website that “targets” Giffords and includes the comment “Don’t retreat … reload” – as a symptom of the tone in US politics.
A guest column in the German Der Spiegel today warned that vitriolic attacks against Mrs. Palin from the left were themselves a manifestation of intemperate anger, and warned they could backfire by making her a victim of political elites.
via In Arizona shooting, Europe sees an America gripped by doubt, pessimism – CSMonitor.com.