Superfans: A Love Story

From “Star Wars” to “Game of Thrones,” fans have more power than ever to push back. But is fandom becoming as toxic as politics?

Article & Photo: https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/09/16/superfans-a-love-story

This article talks about the power that fans and fandoms have across social media and develops a story about these groups of people that recognizes both the overly fanatic and the more humanistic side of the pop-culture landscape.

It starts out by telling the story of Wanna Thompson, a freelance music journalist, and how her tweet about Nicki Minaj needing to be more mature in her lyrics created such backlash from her fans that she lost her internship and had her daughter’s face photoshopped onto a gorilla’s body. After even getting a nasty DM from Nicki Minaj’s official twitter account, Thompson was baffled at how one single tweet could bring her so many problems. The author continues by citing other examples of fandom power such as the extreme anger expressed by fans of Game of Thrones at the series finale and Star Wars’ Last Jedi.  

Besides the fact that it is quite funny and absurd, I enjoyed reading this article as a reflection of the increased power of audiences and the importance to create content that satisfies them. The story was good in emphasizing that wide, varied audiences are shrinking while more dedicated and demanding fandoms are rising. A media company’s main concern these days should be to write plots that truly fulfill the expectations of fans, since “there are certain things where you should listen to them, because they’re smarter than maybe the super-high-up execs are going to think.” Essentially, if companies want to effectively profit from their creations, they should work on finding ways to gather audience input on the development of their stories.

Aspiring psychotherapist Michael Asuncion contributed to the article by stating that “there are three needs that all people have: they want to be seen, they want to be heard, and they want to be valued.” All these needs have clearly been channeled into their favorite movies, series, books and TV shows.

‘Original Reporting’ will be emphasized in Google Searches

Sundar Pichai, Google’s chief executive, discussing Google’s News project. The company said it changed its search algorithm to highlight original reporting.
Sundar Pichai, Chief Executive at Google, discussing how Google will change its algorithm to highlight original reporting.

Reporting today is a lot different than how it was before. Reporters may take weeks or months developing a story, break the story to the world, and then every other organization steals the content rephrases it and posts it on their site. These other sites get just as much traffic and make just as much money off of the article without any reporting at all from these impersonator sites. Google has said in a recent conference that they are starting to combat imitative websites by changing their algorithm. 

Google’s new Google News Project is going to change the way the show results for certain topics that put emphasis on original reporting or the first story that broke the news These changes do not remove all the impersonators but it gives an advantage to the original report. This is a good change for Google because everyone uses Google for everything. These new changes to the algorithm give news companies more of an incentive to create breaking stories because the credit for these stories will be given to who creates the story instead of all the other companies that would steal the work and post it on their site. 

With these guidelines and algorithms Google would also put more respectable outlets that have a history of honest reporting higher up in the search query. These are important changes because investigative journalism is extremely important and needed in society but if no one is going to get credit for the hundreds of hours they take to expose such stories why would anyone want to do all this work. By Google coming out and making these stories more accessible Google is gaining the trust of these news organizations and honestly just helping all of use or freedom of the press. Creating more ways for original reporting to be put on the top of searches helps everyone from the Google user, to the journalist writing these articles, to even Google itself.

Facebook Proposes A Smart-TV Device.

Article: https://www.foxbusiness.com/technology/facebook-is-reportedly-a-smart-tv-device-and-has-asked-neflix-and-disney-for-shows

Image: X

screen-shot-2017-02-28-at-9-36-40-pm-996x587

Facebook has a track record for being untrustworthy and having a scary amount of information on its users and even its non-users. Now, Facebook might be working on a smart-TV device of their own to distribute to consumers.

Shawn M. Carter of Fox Business reports about the recent development from Facebook. Carter says, “Facebook is reportedly preparing to launch a streaming device that, much like Amazon’s Fire Stick, would plug into a TV and offer access to a library of online content”. An interesting thing about this new TV plug-in is that Facebook would provide it as a bundle, with something called a portal family, which would give the people smart tablets, enabling users to video chat with each other. The thing that sets apart Facebook’s device from Apple and Amazon is their device might have a camera and microphones that link to the platform’s video service. Carter says that this, “might allow the company to tap into fun extras, like augmented reality (AR), face effects and interactive stories”. Although, the biggest issue for this streaming platform would be Facebook getting an agreement from Disney or Netflix to stream their content.

I wanted to discuss this article this week because this is an interesting technological development. As stated above, Facebook has not been known for protecting its users from data collecting. Facebook also tried to launch their own streaming service, which never really caught on. The whole premise of Facebook, which already has targeted ads and collects browser data to sell to other companies, creating another platform where they can gather your interests is mind-boggling. Facebook already asks you to connect your account to other apps like Spotify, Instagram, and online games, which grants them further access to how a person spends their time on various devices. I find this interesting because in 2014, smart TVs were under fire for using microphones to survey their users. Facebook has also gone to court on multiple accounts for their privacy issues, and Amazon Alexa is also in trouble for saving conversations its users have when the device is supposed to be dormant. Allowing another device with cameras and microphones seems crazy because people are just bugging their homes and letting Facebook and Amazon know almost everything about them. It feels more dystopian than innovative at this point. I wouldn’t want Facebook to monitor multiple streaming services on top of everything else it monitors. There’s a point where a company knows too much about a person and I don’t want Facebook knowing more about me than I do. I believe it is an important discussion to have about Facebook and invasion of privacy and allowing Facebook-owned cameras/microphones into a person’s house. I’m curious to see if this actually is launched and if there will be any large privacy scandals from it.

Iphone 11, Cop or Drop?

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/10/technology/iphone-11.html

It’s about that time that the new models of the iPhone are being released and for many, the question remains whether people should keep the phones they have now or upgrade. There are some people in the world, who feel the need to have everything new and up to date, no matter what model they currently have. I have an iPhone 7, and it has been a pretty reliable phone for the past 4 years, and I don’t have many complaints. I will be jumping from a 7 to an 11, but for people with iPhone X’s and XR’s will it be worth it to make the switch? There has been some talk online about pricing since the Keynote took place on Tuesday. The base model iPhone 11 is being released for $700 compared to the last years model retailing for $750. It took some consumers by surprise seeing the price drop in the pro models compared to the models last year. Apple has been increasing prices in iPhones over the past couple of years in order to counteract the shortage of iPhone sales. As I was watching the Keynote, I was struggling to try and find the dramatic difference in the models from this year and last year and there wasn’t much to offer. At least the price of the phone doesn’t jump with there being a solid technical reason to. Last year, when Apple released their top models at over $1000 it seemed as though they reached a ceiling, and the XR model that sold at $750 wound up being the top seller. As usual when the new models start to be released the iPhone 8, and the XR price will get discounted. I am curious to see how the new phones are going to sell, compared to last year. I am also curious to see that if these models dont sell as planned, what will Apple do next?

Will Gamers continue stopping at GameStop?

As video gaming continues to evolve, the market for video gaming evolves as well. Technology continues to redefine the way we spend our money. GameStop, a primary retail store for video games recently announced that they are closing over 200 stores across the country. Many video gamers have been buying their games digitally, as opposed to buying a physical copy in stores. According to Business Insider, GameStop is “…applying a more definitive, analytic approach, including profit levels and sales transferability, that we expect will yield a much larger tranche of closures over the coming 12 to 24 months,” Jim Bell, GameStop CFO, said on Tuesday. GameStop is trying to manage its budget while they breath new life into the gaming chain. GameStop has a lot of competition. Digital video game purchases are made to feel so much more convenient. Like physical CD’s, soon video games will be primarily streamed/downloaded on the internet. The past few years have been rough for GameStop, they have continued to fire people, their sales were down 14.3% and throughout the year the company has lost 415 $million. Hopefully, GameStop can evolve with the times and provide their customers with an experience that makes going to GameStop worth it.

To Save Our Democracy, We Need To Save Local News

I found this short article really interesting because it relates to last week’s reading on local news platforms across the United States and how they are making efforts to stay alive by merging with each other. The article emphasizes the importance of local news not for the sole survival of American journalistic tradition, but for the significant role it plays in politics. Since American political dialogue focuses heavily on state and local power, it is essential to have efficient and transparent forms of local news, which have the ability to examine, check and challenge the discourse of their hometowns.

         Last week’s reading talked about the merging practices that are being carried out in order to revitalize the world of local news in a hostile environment where many platforms are shutting down due to lack of audience/revenue. However, the results shown by these tactics will probably not achieve the final goal of returning the public’s attention to their local politicians because the news being shown on local channels are mass-produced by parent companies, which appears to be an effort to simply keep newspapers’ names alive rather than their niche content.         This article argues that rebuilding our local news ecosystem will also strengthen the public’s trust in the media, since it is easier to connect with journalists reporting on substantial local matters rather than banal stories created for entertainment. It is important to make local politics more public so that the population can base their support on transparent information

Article and photo: https://medium.com/@michaelshapiro_67828/to-save-our-democracy-we-need-to-save-local-news-4d38254405d7

What does #BoycottMulan mean for the film’s box market success?

Currently, there’s been a significant increase in criticism from international human right groups concerning the ways in which police are handling confrontations between protesters and the public in Hong Kong, China.

Celebrities are quite notorious for taking to social media to speak out against police brutality, and social issues in general. A little while back, Crystal Liu Yifei, – the actress who will be starring in Disney’s live action version of Mulan, posted a message of support for the Hong Kong police force over Chinese social media. Her post then ignited a wave controversy, and attracted the attention of those in Hong Kong as well as pro-democracy sympathizers from other parts of the world, prompting a #boycottmulan campaign on twitter.

According to wikipedia, Liu’s godfather is Chen Jinfe , the Chairman of Beijing Tongchan Investment Group, so it comes as no surprise that she would be in support of the mainland’s interests.

One of Disney’s intents with the film Mulan is to attract Chinese audiences, and although some may think the actresses comments will dampen Disney’s success with China, it is important to remember that Hong Kong’s box market makes up only a small percentage of Disney’s box market worth in China.

That being said, many of those in the Weste are quite aware of what’s going on in China, support the protests, and are thus, are equally bothered by the actress’s comments. For instance, a quick look up of #boycottMulan on Tumblr’s search engine alone demonstrates that there are a handful of potential viewers in the US who’ve been put off of seeing Disney’s Live Action Mulan precisely because of the actresses comments.

I think if anything Liu’s comments has resulted in bad publicity for the film, though the full extent I think it’ll have on Mulan in terms of the film’s success in the West, is still something I remain unsure of.

https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/8/16/20808691/boycott-mulan-disney-live-action-remake-hong-kong-protests

An Alexa for Kids?

Untitled

Article and image: https://www.cnet.com/news/google-assistant-and-amazon-alexa-could-be-next-targets-for-child-privacy-laws/

Article by: Richard Nieva, Ben Fox Rubin

After our discussion in class about Google being sued $170 million for targeting advertisements to children, I was reminded that children are affected by their own use of the internet. I found this article a few days after our class discussion and I found it very interesting because smart assistant devices are very popular in the United States. Even though this summer was filled with Apple, Amazon and Google getting in trouble for their devices recording users without their knowledge. This article discusses the new Echo Dot Kids Edition version of Alexa that Amazon plans to sell soon. It discusses how after Google and YouTube were sued for ad targeting, that tech companies are exploiting whoever they can and they get away with it because people don’t always think about their children being data mined to sell things. It raises the point that “children are highly vulnerable internet users” to quote Ashley Boyd, Vice President of Advocacy at Mozilla. Children are unable to understand terms and conditions and they shouldn’t be held accountable to consent to Amazon saving their conversations indefinitely. It’s unfair to assume that a five-year-old using YouTube understands that every time they click a video or answer a question before a video is susceptible to being saved to a server to create a profile, they probably don’t know exists nevertheless how to use it.

Another interesting point brought up in this article is intellectual property regarding audio files. Sound is a topic that many people discuss and especially with the rise of the internet and servers storing data indefinitely. Copyright has been talked about because people want to own quotes and conversations, but when you post a podcast, who owns the content? This article talks about how the collection and use of audio files is something that needs to be discussed because kids shouldn’t have to unknowingly have their conversations kept on record. Once that conversation is kept, it can be distributed to whoever Google or Amazon pleases because they own the file. We need to further discuss intellectual property and how to stop big tech companies from commercializing and capitalizing on what we do and say.

Lastly, this article talked about a campaign called Commercial-Free Childhood which piqued my interest because kids cannot dispute what they don’t know. I think it’s important that there is a group that exists for a generation of kids who grow up with technology, not knowing that it can be used against them or that a company can know anything and everything about who they are from the first day they started to use Alexa, Siri, or YouTube.

Dating Apps Paying Fraternities To Throw App-Sponsored Parties To Improve User Engagement.

As the title suggests this is a new approach bumble and tinder are using to market their apps to students on college campuses. Dating Apps are partnering with fraternities in various universities (Oklahoma University, Tulane University and Northwestern University) and having them sign contracts, which ask that they align their house with either tinder or bumble.

When it comes to the parties, app companies are responsible for covering production costs and offering branded merchandise. Some frats are stretching the theme even further by requiring attendees to show their dating profiles at the door as a ticket into the party. The more attendees a frat can get signed up for tinder, the more cash bonuses they’re rewarded with. Overall, the goal with this content strategy is to receive guaranteed growth in tinder and bumble’s target demographics of 18 to 24 year olds.

Of course, the idea of a fraternity throwing a tinder or bumble themed party is not in the least bit intriguing or surprising to me. It strikes me as a kind of partnership that you’d expect to exist in today’s digital age.

When it comes to my thoughts regarding the potential effectiveness of employing such a strategy, I think there is little for tinder and bumble to gain, and the reason I say that has to do with how prevalent and widely used dating apps already are amongst college students.

Which begs the question, what would be the pay off in pushing dating apps on college students if many of them are already on dating apps? Perhaps the answer has nothing to do with dating apps trying convince people to sign up, but to convince current users to remain on their apps and keep users endlessly swiping.

To further explain, people often up and abandon a certain app if it’s not delivering any convenience in their lives. If not for this reason, then it is sometimes because the app has fulfilled some purpose at some point for the user, but not so much anymore, prompting them to uninstall the app.

Now, I may be speaking based off my own assumptions here, but I think when people are consistently sold the idea that an app has worked for others and continues to work for others, then it keeps them from uninstalling the app regardless of their experiences. I find this idea to be generally true when it comes to dating apps.

Therefore, having fraternities sponsor dating apps, and throw app-sponsored parties, makes for an interesting tactic as it gives Tinder and Bumble a large platform to further sell the idea that their apps are working for a large party of people.

Additionally, an ideal consumer for Tinder and Bumble is a dating app user who isn’t looking for anything serious or long-term. This is because in order for dating apps like Tinder and Bumble to truly thrive, “hookup culture” must flourish, as the more prominent hookup culture is, the more dating apps can profit off of it.

Therefore, it makes sense that they’re marketing their apps to young people and college students (tinderU) as opposed to people who are at the end of their 20s and early 30s. The latter is the more likely of the two age groups to want a steady partner rather than a series of short term flings.

https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/8/20/20814152/tinder-bumble-dating-apps-frat-parties-college

https://www.papermag.com/tinder-bumble-fraternities-2639838092.html

.

Uber, Lyft and DoorDash Pledge $90 Million to Fight Driver Legislation in California

=Travelers waiting for rides to arrive at San Francisco International Airport. Uber and Lyft are fighting a bill in California that would change the legal designation of their drivers.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/29/technology/uber-lyft-ballot-initiative.html

CreditCreditAileen Son for The New York Times.

A bill in California’s legislature could soon force the likes of Uber to be treated as employees instead of contractors. A plan both companies are totally against and have over 60 million dollars on a ballot initiative to have their companies exempt from the law. Door Dash a food delivery is contributing 30 million dollars on the ballot. This law will give fair treatment to Uber drivers and left drivers as well as getting paid above minimum wage. This article interests me because it deals with customers like me who use uber and left services in the local Philadelphia area. I think this will eventually make its way to Pennsylvania Area. To counter such an initiative, the ballot that both companies propose would have the driver set their schedule. The companies hope to preserve their concession wages, which set in the ballot initiative. Lyft plans to take their plan directly to the voters to combat the California bill which would make services such as Uber and Lyft to change the status of their drivers from contractors to workers which both companies vehemently opposed. As Lyft spoke person Adrian Durbin stated, “We are working on a solution that provides drivers with strong protections that include an earnings guarantee, a system of worker-directed portable benefits and first-of-its-kind industrywide sectoral bargaining, without jeopardizing the flexibility drivers tell us they value so much,”

This article is interesting to the reader such as me because thousands of riders in Philadelphia uses services such as Uber and, Lyft as well as the fact their type of service continues to grow. A similar initiative such as those in California might pop up in our region as well