WEBSITE 2
The second website is like a library itself the page has Marks Prensky’s book on “digital immigration” which is made easily accessible. The fact that it has an academic book within it means that the page is academically sounds. However this website is simply a book and draws away from new media as being “avante-guarde” (Lister et al, 2003). This website is simply a “refashion of older media”(Lister et al, 2003) and shows how remediation is at work
The website also allows you to upload and publish your own sources of information to be “self mediated” (Lister1, 2003: 77) ok this is obviously a good thing, consumers are no longer “passive” (Branston and Stafford, 2006) of media texts. The Internet has encouraged individuals to have “active engagement” with media texts, this website allows anyone to publish their work (Habermas in, Lister, 2003: 177).This brings into question the quality of information? Does this website allow anyone to publish any old rubbish. There seems to be no guidelines because anyone can upload documents so it does make the website a less reliable source.
Clearly you are trying to relate the site to the whole unit, well done. I think you've set yourself up for a further short paragraph you don't deliver though?
ReplyDeleteThe lack of 'quality control' clearly links to the issues around 'produserism' and the 'junk & jerks' problem doesn't it?