This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
THE NEW MEDIA BOOK EDITED BY DAN HARRIES " Publishing .
Printed by St Edmundsbury Norfolk Press Ltd. and conserving them in the national interest.First published in 2002 by the British Film Institute 21 Stephen Street. London WH 1LN Reprinted 2004 The British Film Institute is the UK national agency with responsibility for encouraging the arts of film and television. This publication copyright © British Film Institute 2002 Preface/Structural Overview copyright © Dan Harries 2002 Other chapters copyright © the contributors Cover design: Barefoot Design Text design: ketchup Set by Fakenham Photosetting. Suffolk Data 2002 British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library ISBN 0-85170-925-7 ISBN 0-85170-924-9 (pbk) (hbk) . Bury St Edmunds.
.4 Production The Business of New Media John Caldwell The New Intertextual Commodity P David Marshal! Innovation.. 3 17 30 40 1...Contents Notes on Contributors Preface 1.4 2.1 2..3 J v ix Cable.....2 1.......4 Texts The Impact of Digital Technologies on Film Aesthetics Michael Allen Narrative Equivocations between Movies and Games Marsha Kinder Online Comics and the Reframing of the Moving Image Scott Bukatman The Myths of Interactive Cinema Peter Lunenfeld 144 133 119 109 .3 2.2 2.. Piracy and the Ethos of New Media Douglas Thomas Emerging Global Ecologies of Production Tom O'Regan and Ben Goldsmith 92 82 69 55 3.. Satellite and Digital Technologies Michele Hilmes Digital Filming and Special Effects Sean Cubitt CD and DVD Anne Friedberg .2 3. Butler .1 3.0 3..0 2...0 Technologies 1..I' The Internet and the World Wide Web Jeremy G.3 3...........1 1..
0 4.1 5.iv THE NEW MEDIA BOOK 4.4 Contexts Old Media as New Media: Cinerna Lev Manovich Old Media as New Media: Television William Uricchio New Media as Old Media: Cinerna Jan Simons New Media as Old Media: Television William Boddy 242 231 219 209 Further Reading Index 254 256 .1 4.3 5.3 4.4 Consumption Interactive Audiences? Henry Jenkins Watching the Internet Dan Harries Self.2 4.0 5. Other and Electronic Media Tara McPherson The Future of Filrn Distribution and Exhibition Janet Wasko 195 183 171 157 5.2 5.
Had I become bored with the near infinite supply of Internet content. a cyberchronotope where both space and time are transformed'.' In many ways. my interest measured in fleeting seconds? Perhaps I had merely settled into a pattern shaped by my habits as a viewer of another little box. nonstop clicking from site to site closely resembled my behaviour in front of the television set: a constant pushing of buttons on the remote control in an endless stream of channel surfing. using such protocols as Gopher and FTP. Even in the early days of the Internet. particularly in the way that the 'screen becomes an "activity center". particularly in relation to current efforts to fuse both computer and television screens into integrated. more or less. and the computer screen retain their separate locations. 'because digital media potentially incorporate all previous media. As Anne Friedberg notes. the Internet has long been host to such 'multimedia' screens. I recently recognised that my obsessive. the home television screen.2 Watching the Internet Dan Harries Sitting in front of my computer screen surfing the Web.4. we are even seeing these previously discrete screens being merged. new media screens as we conceptualise their uses in new and different ways. yet the types of images you see on each of them are losing their medium-based specificity'. users could download and watch small movies (typically short animations demonstrating molecular configurations) while also reading pages and pages of scrollable text linked to other pages of scrollable text. 'the movie screen. 1 In fact. we are witnessing a convergence of media images. precipitated by . interactive entertainment spaces. With the rapid expansion of the World Wide Web in 1993. computer-based editing and special effects. As Henry Jenkins suggests." These are the screens of an expanding media environment where the modes of viewing and using commingle in ways only previously proposed in the narratives of science fiction. it no longer makes sense to think in medium-specific terms' . all screens are becoming. Do I 'view' the Web in a way taught to me by television? Am I using the Internet in the same way that I would 'use' any application on my computer? Or am I literally 'watching the Internet' in a way that combines both viewing and using media? With the growing use of digital video. Screens are becoming loci of an assortment of media activities and experiences. From its inception.
such as film trailers. but fewer people will tune in to all of them. Yet what happens when both of these modes are integrated in a manner where the using affects the viewing. 'more new shows will debut this fallon the Internet than on television. I call this third emerging mode of spectatorship 'viewsing' . such as exploring hyperlinked Web pages or playing online games. Both of these modes are being cultivated by a Hollywood eager to leverage its money-making film and television properties on to the Internet. literally the online viewing of movies in a manner that loosely emulates the viewing of films in the cinema or on a videocassette recorder. Not surprisingly." the term 'user' seems equally inappropriate with its connotations of computational doings and 'too-active-for-narrative-seduction' pursuits. one of the central modes encouraged by the Internet is that of 'viewing'. text began to be augmented with images and sounds. Yet once the major film studios and television networks realised that the Internet was going to be a major media platform. Instead. the film and television industries were relatively slow in developing content for the Internet (once famously referred to by one advertising executive as 'television without the shows')' beyond material that was promotion ally tied to marketing other film and television properties. the major film studios and television networks see the Internet as having the potential to reach a vast and global audience and so they continue to develop entertainment products that combine the entertainment industries' proven ability to 'entertain' with the Internet's ability to 'connect'. As one media critic cynically points out." Nonetheless. television schedules and 'interactive' press kits. .the experiencing of media in a manner that effectively integrates the activities of both viewing and using.172 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK the release of the graphic-oriented browser Mosaic. they dived in with a vengeance. Increasingly. particularly in relation to the content being created by the entertainment industries. such as participating in a real-time online poll that directly affects a live video feed. and vice versa? What do we call this hybrid mode of both viewing and using? While the term 'viewer' still retains a certain sense of passivity long associated with both film and television viewinq. although the viewing numbers are still miniscule when compared to traditional media viewership. These sites have ranged from dedicated online screening rooms to integrated TV-Web shows. 'Viewsers' are the new 'connected consumers' who find entertainment pleasure in the multitasking activities being promoted through their computer and television screens. In other words. but also by what they do and the ways in which their activities have a direct impact on a developing narrative. entertainment value is not only measured by what they see and hear. taken together. Applications such as Shockwave allowed the creation of more interactive content: an early favourite was the 'Pong'-like game in which one could hit a tennis ball with a 'K-Swiss shoe' racket. than saw a single episode of CBS's Survivor' . we are also witnessing a convergence of the ways in which viewers and users interact with media screens and there are a number of ways in which we 'watch the Internet'. A second mode is that of 'using' new media with users following more 'computer-oriented' activities. Not surprisingly. ploughing millions and millions of dollars into the development of entire divisions dedicated to creating online content.
---------~~~~- 173 Together.2 - WATCHING THE INTERNET ~~~~~~~- --. I will examine these three modes of online spectatorship. to pause." The context of online viewing. but rather by a form of 'broadcasting' texts to viewers. medium. As Vivian Sobchack correctly describes downloadable QuickTime movies. These new movie exhibition sites rely heavily on strategies of viewership already groomed by watching film and television. As one critic describes her experience of watching an online film. the experience is similar." In other words. Herky-jerky movement. VIEWING THE INTERNET The activity of 'viewing' has long been of interest to theorists of the moving image. a television clip or a radio broadcast. but it is not. is marked not by the interactivity usually attributed to accessing the Internet. Of course. much like a basic videocassette recorder or DVD player. hence the attraction for an inferior viewing experience. when a spectator heads for a 'viewing' site. Next. jerky film trailer or a clip from last night's news. migrate across media: viewing computer software. And you can't go in the lobby and yell at an usher. a very important factor to keep in mind is that these films are typically watched for free. starts. with the ability to start the film vvhen you choose. each of which proposes different levels of 'activity' and 'interactivity' while watching the moving image. . No response during high traffic.. rather than interactive. 'Pixelations. are 'inserted' into the online exhibition venue. such as a movie. There are. In fact. being far more 'reactive' than 'interactive'.. shows on a television). particularly in relation to how we experience online films. made "precious" by their small size and "scarce" memory'. sites that encourage viewing moving images become alternative movie exhibition venues. but not quite the same. it is almost like watching the real thing (films in a cinema. and repetitions. they are 'full of gaps. these three modes of spectatorship engender new strategies of making meaning that. switching channels on the television set rather than being able to effect a two-way system of communication. for example. including both the visual and soundtracks. and to skip both forwards and backwards. using interactive television and viewsing new media. of course. a distinction made by Raymond Williams in which reactive media display a range of choices that are preset. many derivations of this. from Jean-Louis Baudry's cinematic 'state of artificial regression' to David Bordwell's cuefollowing 'rational agent'. 10 Again. albeit ones with poor quality and the tiniest of tiny screens.' The same concepts can be roughly applied to the ways in which we view online moving images. then. a mode of watching typically anchored in the process of 'narrative immersion' in which texts from other media. jerky and fuzzy (more like gloppy). but basically. games and integrated media experiences and chart the shifting ways in which we are watching the Internet. in turn. gasps. Sudden shutdowns of service. And streamed videos are even worse: small. However. such time-bounded media primarily 'turns hypermedia into a broadcast. Loss of sound.. The amount of interactive functions on such sites is limited. they are seeking access to a small.4. As George Landow comments. the activity involved in watching an online movie is similar to watching a DVD.
sponsorship.174 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK Quite often. the movies themselves are either independently produced short films or previously distributed features with little to no legs left in their marketing (although a studio executive did once acknowledge to me that putting old worn-out films on the Net was good business as people usually reacted so adversely to the streamed movies that they ended up going out and buying a good copy of the film on video). online movie venues have become the world's largest drive-in theatres. What the viewer encountered when they 'entered' the cinema was a three-inch by threeinch screen embedded in a grand. but. more importantly. In other words. much in the same vein as television networks and similar to the AFI Online Cinema. has created further opportunities on the Internet for viewers to watch online movies. to exhibit films that were known and celebrated as movies released before the arrival of the Internet. 'online distributors see greater financial possibilities for shorts online where they earn revenues through advertising. One of the earliest attempts to place previously distributed films on the Internet was accomplished by the American Film Institute in 1997 with the launch of the AFI Online Cinema. As John Geirland writes. In many ways. rather than the content of the movies themselves. the sheer choice of online films available to watch is impressive. When the movie began. the Web may be the ideal medium for distributing and exhibiting short films. com (established in 1998 and currently offering streaming feature-length films at 50 cents per screening) and IFilm. the Online Cinema was one of the first sites to not only embed the film into a graphic and cinematic interface. there must have been some sort of 'collective' excitement attached to the viewing of a real movie being streamed into their own computers from a server based in California. "3 Although the quality of films that are screened is mixed. The formation of online networks and movie portals. graphic interior of an old movie palace. for viewers simultaneously watching the film from across the globe. with many of these sites offering hundreds of titles from which to choose. complete with sheer golden curtains and red velvet seats. Although QuickTime movies and streaming video had been around for a few years. these are films that are rarely seen in other exhibition venues and a good deal of their entertainment value can be placed on the sheer sense of being 'able' even to watch the films.than in admission-paying movie houses. although some of the entertainment pleasure must have been derived from the sheer sense of accomplishment by successfully downloading the plug-in and getting the movie to play somewhat fluidly. licensinq fees and e-commerce partnerships . People came to the site to watch a Charlie Chaplin or Buster Keaton film. the viewer would see a small movie playing on the screen accompanied by an audio track coming through the computer's speakers. BijouFlix. like watching a revolving Zoetrope.com (launched in 1999 and funded by Sony and Kodak) are two of the portals that have emerged as leaders in an effort to exhibit independent short films to an ever-increasing online public. complete with plenty of non-film related distractions and equally poor image and audio quality. but." In fact. And with the current limitation of bandwidth and external technological factors. and to do this all for free. . as is the quality of films being screened in non-online cinemas. The experience seemed almost primitive.
Users have the ability to change many aspects of the entertainment content they are encountering. to the 'using' entertainment experience. the moving of objects or the solving of riddles. though. even worse. One of the more overhyped elements of online media is the promise of increased interactivity between user and entertainment content. you begin to realise how little interactivity there really is beyond the decision of what pages to 'enact' or what links to 'react' to and click upon. ironically. quite often. In the not-too-distant future.is the only narrative occurring in the game. as the parameters of the experience are often predetermined. when you consider the amount of interactivity involved in accessing a Web page through a browser (primarily clicking on a hyperlink to retrieve a file). Sites such as The Spot. As Lev Manovich succinctly reminds us. This is often juxtaposed to the relative passivity associated with both cinematic and television viewing. Unlike the 'viewing' experience. This is most commonly seen in the playing of computer and video games where users travel through virtual worlds or decipher encrypted codes. Usually. USING THE INTERNET 'Using' the Internet. In other words. Some of the earliest attempts by Hollywood to put 'original' entertainment on to the Internet were efforts to create new media properties that had this 'added feature' of limited interactivity. such narratives evoked broader narrative worlds and contexts. however. and any attempt to replicate such an experience through hyperlinked Web pages was doomed to . therefore creating more of an activity of enacting and reacting than actually interacting. clicking through Web pages did not provide the immersive experience that one gets with both film and television. yet the parallels between Web and channel surfing in terms of interactivity seem to suggest something quite different. is a spectatorship anchored in the realm of computer 'interactivity': the pushing of buttons. In fact. Eon 4 and The Pyramid fostered a spectatorship defined through actions of 'narrative exploration' in which the user explored multilinear options of a story and literally 'read' media content. on the other hand. rather like reading a novelisation of a hit movie or. the typing of answers. quite often through multitasking and toggling between multiple windows. the television set. as well as navigating through predetermined narrative co-ordinates. like browsing through a series of film storyboards without getting to see the film. controlled interaction within the storyworld is primary. '14 Yet one might also argue that such experiences are still more 'reactive' than 'interactive'.4. 'If the player does nothing. The spectator's pleasure is predicated on the amount of interactivity one can have with both the medium and its content. and intertextually relied on these narrative schemata for situating the entertainment experience. the Internet remains excellent due to its ability to transfer digitised movies around the globe. As a mode of media distribution. the narrative stops. the downloading of DVD movies will be the norm and one will then be able to view the films in a more technologically stable and controlled environment such as. if not necessary. such interaction .2 - WATCHING THE INTERNET 175 viewing films on the Internet remains a challenging and fairly non-interactive experience. In fact. such as film and television.
and many entertainment-based Web sites. in many ways. the removal of navigational buttons on customised launched browsers. make [sic] her alternate between concentration and detachment'. User interaction within these games is typically based on typing answers into a provided box.it simply means stating the most basic fact about computers' . a viewer plunged into a world of total interactivity becomes so involved in conscious decision-making that she or he has less of an ability to 'let go' and enter a realm of narrative seduction.176 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK failure. sometimes with audio applause. for example. in comparison to cinema and television. all of these sites quickly became costly failures as users quickly grew tired of the shows' stories and spent more time doing the associated activities. As Lev Manovich argues. Not surprisingly. designing and calculating. is how the content -centred diegetic world as we traditionally know it in film and television rarely exists with the diegetic and non-diegetic worlds collapsed. than getting 'caught up' in the unfolding narratives. check spelling. It is difficult to sense interaction in situations in which one is simultaneously affecting all of the parameters'. submitting the information via a button and having the game 'react' to the answer. Manovich argues that new media have become the perfect realisation of this notion as users straddle different modes of interaction. Recognising this limited spectatorial paradox. . prevent the subject from falling into the dream world of illusion for very long. To this end. at other times with a graphic proclaiming 'Wrong!'. the continuous presence of the communication channel in the message. a hindrance to narrative immersion. in order to simulate more traditional notions of immersive entertainment. major film studios and television networks have realised that.'5 Yet how do these computerbased interactive features affect the user's ability to become actually immersed in a narrative experience? Referring to Benjamin's concept of 'perception in the state of distraction'. If. 'to call computer media "interactive" is meaningless . in its own right. Ironically. Just think of any word processing program and the instant ability to change fonts. The resulting experience of this state of distrac- tion can be unsatisfactory in terms of how we experience traditional entertainment content as the user ends up viewing little and doing even less. contrary to conventional wisdom centred on the need to increase the level of interactivity on the Internet. Web creators have worked to eliminate levels of interactivity. making the site even more reactive than interactive. already steeped in heavy interactivity. or cut and paste a paragraph. 17 In other words. Another interesting feature of these game sites. He writes that 'the periodic reappearance of the machinery. the computer is. The computer is full of interactivity and this is what makes it so powerful for writing. stating that 'it is ironic that wide-open interaction within a system that does not impose significant constraints is usually unsatisfying to the interactor. traditional forms of media entertainment play better when there is a decrease in interactivity. Websites based on popular television game shows where the focus centres on inserting the user into the text rather than broadcasting the text to the viewer are often characterised by this limited level of interactivity. such as sending e-rnails to the shows' stars. David Rokeby argues that interactivity is.
and can easily have well over 100. The Wheel of Fortune site provides a close approximation of how the game is played on television. Modelled as a generic television game show." An interesting example of this limitation of interactivity is the 'You Don't Know Jack' online trivia game. but also from the interactive 'playing' of the game against other logged-on network users._ . far removed from the glamour and exposure of national television. lTV's Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? game site goes to great lengths to evoke the widely watched television version of the show while still providing a fun game for the user to play. no in-studio crowd gasping at your wrong answers and no chance to 'phone a friend'.. Yet for all of its limited interactivity and canned sound effects. The screen width is fixed. No matter how hard one tries. In contrast to this.. its interface envelops the entire computer workspace. For example.000 players logged on playing the online games at any moment. your answers are heard. You spin the wheel. responded to and even applauded as your interaction affects the game for the other players as well. the experience still seems like a . Wheel of Fortune and The Dating Game. other sites have had even greater success in combining the identifiable brand of known television game shows with extra features of limited interactivity. there is no Chris Tarrant (the television show's host) prodding you for your 'final answer'. with interactive options that narrowly affect only your version of the game.. the lights rapidly dim when you are asked a question and you are even given the chance to go '50/50'. the site seems like just another computer game. While the 'Jack' online game creates a balance between looking like a television game show and offering a limited palate of interactivity. its fonts cannot be altered and your interactive options have been reduced to the simple pushing of the 'P' or the '0' keys on the keyboard.2 - WATCHING THE INTERNET ----_.. You hear the same theme music as you 'enter' the stage.. Sony's Station. intertextual sight as the user begins to feel as if he or she is 'part of the show'.. the reappearance of those same graphics on your computer screen is a friendly. serving as one of the key structural devices for the entertainment experience as well as the sites' more interactive features. As the television show itself relies heavily on the use of computer graphics to display both the questions and answers during the game. as well as such classic parlour card games as solitaire and spades._---------- . As the game opens up on the computer screen. But the game remains fun and entertaining despite such removals because the content is so compelling and the user is led to forget that she or he is playing on a computer connected to a network. Yet unlike the Who Wants to Be a Millionaire? game site. On the site. However. 'Jack' is a downloaded program that retrieves new content through an online connection.... you guess at what the missing letters are and you can even 'buy a vowel'. ------- 177 creating a space where navigation is content. the entertainment pleasure on this site is derived not only from the pleasures associated with a direct affiliation with a well-known television programme. _-. com features a number of multiple-player online games based on hit television game shows such as Jeopardy!. While its irreverent humour and televisual aesthetics make it a very entertaining game to play.4. the most compelling aspect of the game is how much it channels user activity by removing typical features of computer interactivity.
many production companies are developing programmes that are initially conceived as interactive properties in which logged-on viewsers directly influence the developing narrative in real time and visibly on the televised and Web-based moving imaqe. it has almost always been possible to playa QuickTime movie in one window while scrolling through text in another. online viewsing experiences by Hollywood is relatively new. major film studios and television networks have quite literally failed to think outside of the (television) box when developing online sites that might harness the best qualities of both television and the Internet. it is the integration (and mutual influencing) of the two primary spectatorial activities that creates a true 'viewsing' experience on the Internet. head of new media for Creative Artists Agency. Web sites are now being developed which foster 'viewsing' modes of spectatorship. confuse this hybrid form of spectatorship with the side-by-side and parallel activity that one can do while sitting at a networked computer. if one really does want to experience the 'real' thing. suggests. in relation to entertainment content on the Web. 'some of those who have struggled have looked at the Internet as a means of distributing traditional content rather than as an opportunity to create something new' . Rather than attempting to 'convert' television programmes to an interactive environment (such as Jeopardy!). as stated above. such 'cognitive multitasking' creates a viewsing experience in which one's interaction with the content has an immediate effect on the outcome of the experience and can be shared between connected viewsers. '" Most importantly. Rather. but falling short. there are ample opportunities on these sites to call the free phone number and sign up to be a contestant on the show. however. As Dan Adler. is often couched within a desperate need by the sites to make overt links to the cinematic and the televisual for their larger framing as 'Hollywood entertainment'. possibly at the expense of developing innovative means for more direct experiences of interactivity. The exploratory activity of the user.CU In many ways. reinforcing a strong link to the television programme and overtly indicating that one's participation here is different from the real thing . This is now changing. effectively combining the viewing of moving images with the interactive functions provided by microprocessing and digitisation. which is already embedded in modern computer usage and involves a combination of multiple and oscillating activities. Whereas the viewing of online movies or the using and playing of online games such as Wheel of Fortune have been available for some time now. therefore. Entertainment creators and producers have begun to develop 'programming' that operates effectively across and between different media. VIEWSING THE INTERNET Although sites that encourage either viewing or using entertainment content on the Web have been the prevailing locale for Hollywood's entry into online media. the creation of original." . Of course.like playing the related board game in one's own living room. One should not.178 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK popular computer game trying to attain the entertainment value of either film or television. especially as they have most typi- cally been tied to other film and television properties already in existence. much in line with Manovich's concept of 'cognitive multitasking'.
30 pm on its digital television channel. you can see the show first on the Internet. into the house. comprising 45 minutes of 'highlights' six days a week. Similar to de Bus are the Web sites built around the popular television series Big Brother. Channel 4 broadcasts the day's highlights each evening on regular broadcast television. Yet even more important to the viewsing experience is how the site's developing narrative is also reliant on the online assembly of viewsers who are granted the opportunity to vote for which contestants they like and do not like. E4. The audience is able to watch the contestants 'live' 24 hours a day via live Webcams. in which ten or 11 people are selected to live in a house together for nine weeks with one person being voted off by the public each week. Essentially. online polling. On the US's CBS Big Brother site. This created almost 24/7 high-resolution access.4. While the use and prevalence of live Webcams is not terribly new on the Web. a 'fan cam' that follows a particular house member who was voted on by viewsers the previous day. with launch of the companion Web site for the de Bus television programme produced by the Dutch television network SBS. Spectators can also sign up for constant text update messages via their mobile phones for those times when they are not near either a television or a computer. This mixture of viewing the contestants on the bus and performing associated user activities such as chats and online polling offers a varied spectatorial palette where one votes and keeps a check on the ever-changing tally while watching the bus riders with the lower percentages of audience votes squirm. probably the most interesting aspect of this show in terms of creating a viewsing experience was Channel 4's decision to broadcast live edited feeds each day and night from 11. and a 'spin camera' that the user can control him or herself. One of the first attempts to do this was in February 2000. is parasitic to the 'Webcast'. taking part in constant opinion polls and being able to watch four live video feeds that are accessible 24 hours a day and only available when one purchases a 'Big Brother Season Pass' for $19. two live camera mixes. in comparison to streaming video. where the audience takes an active role in determining the unfolding narrative events. including taking a 3D virtual tour of the house. It provided for some quite unusual viewing. In other words.00 pm to 5. the show borrows the successful formula of the MTV-produced Real World series and loads 11 strangers on to a double-decker bus for a four-month trip around the Dutch countryside. Like its American counterpart. what makes this site a bit more interesting in terms of viewing is that the television programme. However. The UK's Channel 4 version of Big Brother has an even greater integration of viewing and using activities built into the programme as a 'package'. Its Web site. however. contributing to the very active chatrooms where fans exchange views on the happenings within the house.2 - WATCHING THE INTERNET 179 Such viewsing activities have found a particularly fertile home among the assortment of 'reality' TV programmes that have become huge hits on television screens around the world and have generated enormous amounts of 'hits' on Web sites. These shows are built on the premise of spying and constant surveillance. features chatrooms. there are a number of activities that combine viewing the ongoing lives of the people in front of the cameras with using the site to perform various interrelated tasks. and every two weeks the least-liked person is booted off the bus. including cameras .95 (see plate 07).
This convergence between the television screen. But when they are combined. while three 'agents' try to 'capture' him. computer screen and the mobile phone screen creates a viewsing opportunity that reaches beyond the expected parameters of traditional entertainment by integrating the entire experience and capitalising on the strengths of each medium. and the physical world'. the activity of both viewing the television programme and using the online interactive features creates an entertainment experience that harnesses the strengths of both television and the Internet without compromising the unique qualities of each medium.180 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK focused on individual house members sleeping that was often toggled with views provided by the Internet cameras in different parts of the house." The way they plan to achieve this is by developing an experience that is integrated from the start. is the way in which the logged-on and television-watching viewser can help solve the narrative's enigma ('Where is the runner?') while building on the contributions by other viewsers. As Chris Moore. SWITCHING/LOGGING OFF Online entertainment spectatorship. whose founders include actors Matt Damon and Ben Affleck. LivePlanet. based on the online game 'Reality Run. live events and the Internet in which all three media are essential components to the experience. at least the spectatorship nurtured by the major film studios and television networks. Media conglomerates are trying hard to work out the best way to leverage their proven ability to create . is obviously one of multiplicity and it is in flux. CEO of LivePlanet. besides the multitude of safety issues involved in generating a nationwide 'manhunt'. a recently launched film/television/Internet venture. states that it is dedicated to producing 'entertainment experiences that break down the barriers between traditional media. 'each medium will provide a stand-alone entertainment experience. explains. In other words. but viewers can win a share of the pot by digging up and sharing clues about the runner's whereabouts on the Web.' which is in turn based on the film Running Man (1987). It is the creation of entertainment 'programmes' that are integrated from their inception that offers the richest experience for future viewsers. The LivePlanet-designed twist? Not only can potential contestants apply to be runners or agents online. '24 The premise of The Runner is intriguing and challenging in the way it offers an integrated media experience: A 'runner' competes for a $1 million-plus prize by completing a series of 'missions' across the country. viewsing becomes the true manifestation of multimedia spectatorship and offers media audiences an interesting and engaging interactive experience. These are the new generation of integrated entertainment media projects that combine television. A good example of the new integrated viewser experience is LivePlanet and ABC Television's The Runner. new media. What makes The Runner so unique and tricky in terms of viewsing. In this manner. people will get a better overall experience because we have built everything to work together from the start.
1975).html>. Stam (eds). 'Short Attention Span Theater'. suggests that such large-scale endeavours to make medium might be economically premature. 1995). 17. in Toby Miller and Robert to Film Theory (London: Blackwell. Lev Manovich. p. 9. 'Film Theory and Spectatorship Gledhill and Williams (eds) . p. A Companion 3. 8. 332. David Bordwell. salon. 4.8423. Russell Collins. 'The End of Cinema: Multimedia and Technological Change'.com/articles/mag/ 0. 140. 34. 'One Critic's Trip to Movies on the Net'. 2001). Reinventing Film Studies.0: The Convergence of Contemporary Critical Theory and Technology (Baltimore. 'view' narratives over the Internet. p. the 'Iiveness' of television and the 'connectedness' of the Internet. 'The Work of Theory in the Age of Digital Transformation'. By integrating the illusory 'realness' of cinema. vol.salon. 'Nostalgia for a Digital Object: Regrets on the Quickening of QuickTime'. 26 August 1995.4. Television: Technology and Cultural Form (New York: Schocken Books.htm>. in the Age of "Posts"'. 2000). 6. Henry Jenkins. Although the dramatic and costly failure of DreamWorks to launch pop. Marc Gunther. 'Full Stream Ahead'. In 'The End of Cinema: Multimedia and Technological Change'. camera obscura. 44. 'computer "users" are not spectators.com.139. Reinventing Film Studies (London: Arnold. 1997). 'Transforming Mirrors: Subjectivity and Control in Interactive Media'. The Language of New Media (Cambridge.2 - WATCHING THE INTERNET 181 immersive experiences within a context of linked interactivity. 15. in Christine Gledhill and Unda Williams (eds). co-founder Spot/Soap of the California advertising agency Fattal & Collins. <www. Autumn 1999. quoted in 'Hitting the The Economist. Critical Issues in Electronic Media (Albany: State University of New York Press. 'use' interactive games and eventually take part in integrated media experiences as 'viewsers'. p. See Jean-Louis Baudry. p. Fiction Film (Madison: University of Wisconsin Press. 12. 395. 1985). As Anne Friedberg rightly points out. p. 5. George Landow.. 250. Narration in the Raymond Williams. true viewsing experiences can now be created and accessed by a global audience. Notes 1. John Geirland.).com/tech/ 14.com.. 1999). the Web a sustainable entertainment 13. 7. 'The Apparatus: Metapsychological Approaches to the Impression of Reality in the Cinema'. 439. p. p.business2.1640. Operas in Cyberspace'. p. pp. p. in Robert Stam and Ella Habiba Shohat. Anne Friedberg. p. delivering original programming a site devoted to for the Internet. Autumn 1976. Millennium Film Journal no. not viewers'. 21 July. Vivian Sobchack. 10. 1. 55. <www. 11. MA: MIT Press. Ibid. 7 June 2000. 247. Ibid. 207. p. no. Susan Wloszczyna. 159. Fortune. USATodaycom. 448. <www. 2. . 5.com/life/cyber/tech/cth497. Hypertext 2. feature/1999/07 121 Ishort_films/index. 104-28. 1999. This has created an assortment of online sites where spectators can learn more about film and television shows. 16. David Rokeby.OO. in Simon Penny (ed. MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.usatoday. 9 October 2000.html>.
this form of viewsing was previously developed by the online porn industry as logged-on users could type instructions to the on-screen 'actors'.com/inconcept. As quoted in Marc Gunther. 'Full Stream Ahead'. ABC had placed this project on hold following the events of 11 September. .html>. 25. p. See Sean Cubitt. 1998). p. 23. 31 July 2001. Experiences 24.6115.ew. 210. 21. 19. Entertainment Weekly's EWCOM. 22. Ibid. Lev Manovich.com/ew/report/0. 79. 20. Josh Young. Like many aspects of the Internet.00. 14 December 2000. 'LivePlanet Unveils Integrated Media Concept-Entertainment that Span Traditional Media. New Media and the Physical World'.html> . <www. LivePlanet Press Release. <www.182 THE NEW MEDIA BOOK 18. As of November 2001. 'Good Will Games'. Digital Aesthetics (London: Sage.liveplanet. The Language of New Media.169443-6-0-storybehindmattand.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.