Shared Fantasies: The World of Fandoms

Fandoms have become huge in our generation, whether it’s boy bands or popular television shows, there is most likely a page dedicated to that specific content. For these fans, it gives them a sense of community, where they can post certain aspects of a TV show or movie they watch where other fans who share the same love can post too. This kind of shared fantasy is an important aspect for the entertainment industry because they have this hue fan base following their work and creating content that spreads even further so that other people can discover the shows or bands as well and become fans.

Fans of TV shows like lost, create content in the themes of romance, friendship, and community. they take certain aspects that involve two characters, they choose the music and the feel of the content that will be shared with their community of fans, it is there way of connecting with the show and sharing content with other fans that share the same interest in those particular characters.

Fan-made media is shared among a community with common passions. In some cases, fans produce stories or videos to give to one another explicitly as gifts.

Fans often send gifts to other fans as a way of also connecting as well. I don’t know about everyone else, but I like connecting with other fans of TV shows and movies because it makes the experience more fun, and who doesn’t like to talk to other people who watch the same shows as you? In this case with certain fandoms like heroes, or Marvel and DC movies, etc; fans create content for other fans o view and talk about among each other, creating this safe community for others to be a part of. Between sending gifts, creating pages, and putting content together for certain television shows, movies, and music are the fans way of not only showing gratitude to whatever it is they are supporting, but as a way of being a part of something that is important to them and that they love to do.

BUtGand

Advertisements

Popular and Mass Culture In Our Society

There is a distinction between mass culture and popular culture, and our society and the world of technology benefits greatly from both. Mass culture is media texts that are mass produced, in other words they are distributed all over the web for anyone and everyone to come across. Whereas, popular culture is media texts which have been meaningfully integrated into people’s lives, something a person is particularly interested in will most likely pop up on their news feed wherever they browse. These mediums help consumers to get exactly what they want, but both very rarely come in contact with each other, only¬† a small fraction does. This helps separate what both services do, but in the end, whichever way you choose to go, you will get what you are looking for.

If the cultural commodities or texts do not contain resources out of which the people can make their own meanings of their social relations and identities, they will be rejected and will fail in the marketplace. They will not be made popular.

In other words, if you come out with a new product and you want to target a certain group of people, say teenagers for example. The last thing you want to do is market it in the wrong place where adults reside, because they won’t relate to it, and won’t be able to make their own meaning out of it because it wasn’t mean’t for them. this could jeopardize your success in the marketplace and your product could fail.

making sure that whatever you publish to the public, or create in your company, that it is being distributed to the right people. Ultimately your goal is to distribute it to a large audience, but you want it to go to the right audience. you want to send the right message so that the right people get a hold of it and want more, or what to buy your product.

Audiences pluralize the meanings and pleasures [mass culture] offers, evade or resist its disciplinary efforts, fracture its homogeneity or coherence, raid or poach upon its terrain. And that people produce culture when they integrate products and texts into their everyday lives.

people will read or become interested in something they can relate to and integrate into their lives. At the end of the day, you’re only going to show your interest in something that you know you will be interested in and something that you will actually use. You aren’t going o buy or read something that doesn’t benefit you, that’s how our culture is. We don’t pay attention to things that don’t matter to us.

That’s why companies pay attention when you click on a link to a store and on Facebook you see the exact same products that you viewed on google or in your browser. this is how they keep their consumers interested, and they base that on what people like. In the terms of popular culture, they will put out content that they know their viewers will like, and that they know is popular t that particular group. At the end of the day, the consumers and readers are what matters. Put the information out in one wrong place and you have the possibility of your product or article not reaching success.Folk and Popular Culture

Spreadable Media in the Digital Age.

We live in an age where many production companies are using spreadable media to promote new content, and with millions of people on the internet sharing these media content help boost their popularity in ways that are not only convenient, but cheaper.

One of the problems with this spreadable media environment is ha you need to understand and recognize that success is unpredictable. he biggest response to this that Lotz says is:

Television, film, and recording industry executives all work in a universe in which they know full well that more than 80 percent of what they develop and create will fail commercially. The key problem is that they don’t know which 10 to 20 percent might actually succeed. So, while it is painful from a resource-allocation standpoint, the strategy has been to produce far more creative goods than might succeed and then see what works.

Spreadable media, in some instances, enjoy the low costs of production which can be good. Audiences don’t hold that same expectation to production budget as companies do that “hobble established media” as the article puts it.

Another argument is that spreadable media reduced costs, and allows creators to “release preliminary content and then follow up on successes with sequels or extensions.” In other words, the best way to predict new success is to build on past success. With digital sharing being a big thing in our society right now, the content can be spread at a broader rate, and to bigger audiences. Another quote from the article explains this in more detail.

Available when and where audiences want it: Producers, whether professional or amateur, need to move beyond an “if you build it, they will come” mentality, taking (or sending) material to where audiences find it more useful.

People will respond and share content if it has some meaning to them or if they are drawn to it. You won’t share a video, a tweet, or an article if you aren’t interested. So companies take this into consideration when they are promoting something or putting out content for the public. After all, they won’t be successful without the sharing audience.

A New Era of Journalism

The article that I chose was about the “golden age” of journalism. With internet being the biggest thing of out generation, more and more people are turning to the internet to get their information and newspapers are being neglected. Magazines and newspapers were how people got their news for years, magazines had to be bought at newsstands, newspapers were sent to your house. it was unheard of that you would get this information online. But with smartphones and internet everything is readily available at your fingertips. When TV’s were introduced in the 1950’s so were news stations, which back then kind of became the golden age of print news and journalism, since people were getting their news from the TV, but were still reading newspapers nonetheless.

The new journalism break through happened and an alternative press moved onto the scene briefly in the late 1960’s and early 70’s. Magazines started becoming a big thing, and newspapers were flying off the shelves, journalism was in its prime, or like the article keeps mentioning it was in its golden age. As the 21st century came along long gone were the days of newspapers on your desk, and magazines in your hands, and they ended up in your pockets. As the internet started taking over in every aspect, newspapers have started to dwindle over the ears, and newspaper companies have started to suffer with their ads, which were a big part of newspapers and how they kept those running, but with the internet taking over and ad companies started moving to the online route, newspapers have started to collapse.

Some cities with more than one newspaper are still doing alright, while other cities with only two have turned into one pagers and have sized down, soon after many newspaper companies started to collapse and bankruptcies took place, one of the notable ones being the Boston Globes.Many people are getting the same news on the TV, and on the internet and don’t turn to newspapers anymore, which makes these companies suffer and lose money, which makes the journalism world a little different these days. The issue with this is, reporters of a certain era, and reporters of these newspapers have a possibility of losing their jobs, and people like me who dreamed of working for a newspaper are stuck with the burning question, how long will it take till newspapers meet their demise? and what will new coming journalists do if this happens?

While the online journalism is taking over, it’s changing the original meaning and depth that newspapers once had. This story is very important for every journalist to read, because it covers what the new age of journalism is doing for the rest of the industry, and how much it is shaping what other journalists have to do to keep their jobs especially if they are from a different era.