Having only had a few encounters with "youths" this week I’ve not had many chances to observe, however the encounters I’ve had certainly fit modern stereotypical behaviour of 'chavs'.

Mostly the young people I observed used them as mini-ghetto blasters (one even during a film… I may have ruined the research by politely telling him to turn it off).

I do find that quite a lot of young people use their phones as a form of self-expression. They play music loudly out of their phone much in the same way that the old ghetto blasters of the 80s were used (but thankfully quieter than them).

The reading talks about the concept of 'apparatgeist' or "the spirit of the machine that influences both the designs of the technology as well as the initial and subsequent significance accorded them by users, non-users and anti-users" - Katz and Aakhus (2002). You can see how this concept of apparatgeist fits in with the use and significance that mobile phones hold in this modern era.

The mobile phone has certainly evolved since the days of my lowly Nokia 3310. Instead of just a simple communications device, through convergence we get a personal organiser, games machine, portable music player and obviously a telephone all wrapped up into one small device. The spirit of the machine has changes from a communications device to something more. This device now lets the youth of today carry around a tool that can help themselves self-express to those around them (much to my ears displeasure).

Although I never witnessed it, the uses the youth of today have for mobiles is still going to be fairly similar to the old uses. As the reading suggests, there is an international culture of phone use among teens and an almost near-universal way in which people perceive communications use in their lives.

*= No young people were harmed during this research, however one was shouted at.

 In order to start researching on this I began looking through old notes from lectures we have had on social capital. This led me to theorists talked about previously. Namely, Bordieu, Coleman, Putnam, Fukuyama, etc. With these theories as a starting point I decided to take a visit to Central Library. Having only visited once, and there not being a dedicated Media section I decided on Sociology as a starting point.

 Being quite a specific subject that I am researching, Social Capital for personal gain online, I found it quite tricky to find books that were of uswe to me. However, I found a few, more generalised, books with sections that related to my research.

 A book by Darin Barney - The Network Society (2004) had a section talking about the discourse of community. Much like this weeks reading it talks about the fact that the word community had lost it's meaning by having so many meanings. It talks about how community could relate to a place where people live, a group of people who share a common interest, or people who hang out or communicate because of a shared interest, it defines people as a community even if they just have the shared interest and dont neccessarily meet.
This adds a little complication when researching my particular area as I'm talking about social capital and how it relates to a network of people, or a community.

 Another interesting book I sourced was called "Growing up digital: the rise of the net generation"  by Don Tapscott (1998)
Despite being related to the younger audiences of chatrooms and forums, I felt some of the theories were relevant to my research.
More specifically the mention of Faucault's "Web of Power" theory. This talks about how the "incitement to discourse", or the starting of a discussion about a particular subject, leads to increased knowledge on that subject. This then leads to increased power for the individual.
Power, in this context, seems to relate directly back to Social Capital and how the starting of a discussion can help them to gain information.

 I plan to visit the Central Library some more after finding some more specific book titles and subjects that I feel will be more relevant.   

What is Yours, Ours, and Mine:
Authorial Ownership and the Creative Commons – Emily Apter

OCTOBER 126, Fall 2008, pp. 91–114. © 2008 October Magazine, Ltd. and Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

In this article Apter refers to ‘Creative Commons’ as

“a generic term to refer to aesthetic and intellectual property that rightfully belongs to the public sphere or should be protected as an open source outside the range of corporate copyright law”

rather than the copyright movement of the same name.

The article explores the world of copyright law, plagiarism and the freedom to use others ideas without fear of legal reprisal.

Apter begins by referring to cases where authors have taken inspiration from folk tales and others biographical accounts, then gone on to publish a work which caused them to suffer from being sued by the ‘original’ owner of such a tale.

Apter goes on to talk about the work of Jonathan Letham and the idea of ‘imperial plagiarism’ where creative workers take inspiration from primitive, third world or privileged (better) artists.

This ‘imperial plagiarism’ idea is applied to the Walt Disney company and it’s plundering of folklore for story ideas. Letham describes the irony that Disney takes others works to produce their animations, yet aggressively pursue legal action with anyone using any of their works.

Apter quotes Letham as saying “Don’t pirate my editions; do plunder my visions. The name of the game is Give All.”

She uses this to show that inspiration shouldn’t be discouraged, just the act of outright plagiarism.

The article then goes onto explore the boundaries of public/private space and where the lines blur. She references a piece of film work called ‘Stealing Beauty’ by Guy Ben-Ner, this is a short film involving people acting out real acts of living within room displays in Ikea stores.

Apter ends the article by referring to an interesting case involving an author called Romain Gary who after winning the Goncourt literature prize went onto publish more books under a pseudonym Emily Ajar. One of these works went onto winning another Goncourt prize (which can only be awarded once to an author).

Gary then convinced a nephew to impersonate Ajar so he could accept the prize for him. This backfired later when the nephew blackmailed Gary to continue writing for him as Ajar so he could continue to live the highlife. By doing this he had effectively taken over Gary’s copyright.

Ironically Gary’s work then went onto being accused of plagiarising Ajar’s work.

Apter concludes by bringing up several interesting ideas on ownership and creative practice.

“Is free property definable only as freedom from the legalistic strictures that privatize and corporatize signature”

“How does one deal legally with the ephemeral ownability of language and creative property?”

“What are the ethical and political consequences attendant on the border-policing of the creative commons by copyright and patent holders?”

These are several interesting questions that Apter proposes and it all fits in with my research on the creative industries.

The article was of interest to me mainly due to the links with the Creative Commons movement (the copyright alternative) and its ties with commercial creativity.

I’m investigating the way in which government policy is trying to shape our creative digital industries through policy, and Apter’s thoughts on who exactly owns creativity and if we should have works as a format of free creative common are key to the core of my research.

I plan on using this article to bolster the counter argument to strengthening copyright laws and supporting old business models, which the implication from the digital Britain report points towards. 

This week we are going to conduct some ‘informal’ ethnographic research into youth mobile phone culture.  When you are out and about on your travels over the coming week, whether it be on the bus, walking around campus, or in Birmingham City Centre, try and look how youths use their mobile phones.  Do they use them as fashion accessories?  Mini-ghetto blasters?  A camera?  Do your findings relate in any way to this week’s reading?

Please post your response by 2pm next Thursday 3 December.

This is a roughly accurate account from the start to the present of my personal experiences with the internet.

-Early 1998 First experiences of the web via expensive subscription based services (AOL) on a 32kb modem!

-Got first access to the web at home on family computer using a premium call dial up service (costly indeed). Moving on we then went onto using a new ISP called Freeserve at local rate calls using a 56kb modem!

-Was now using the web to find people of interest and chat with them via ICQ (think MSN messenger but you could look up people in a directory). This then progressed to first experiences of using persistent chat rooms via IRC (internet relay chat).

-Early 1999 meeting the same people regularly on the net encouraged me to take up blogging using a fairly new site at the time, called Livejournal.

-Was starting to use the web for direct media downloads. MP3’s to my minidisk player and low quality films were all downloaded over hours and days via the awesome might of my 56k modem. Was also using my 6th forms web connection in the day to explore music downloads.

-The family got broadband and I got my own PC. Finally the web was opened up for gaming and fast media downloads.

-Applied for a Visa credit card simply so I could engage with shopping on the web. Bought stuff I couldn’t get in this country from a German website.

- In 1999 Napster was suddenly where the free music scene was at and I jumped on the pirate bandwagon. This was to continue till the lawsuit’s brought it to its knees (around 2001) and everyone moved onto sites like the Pirate bay and Demonoid.

-Bought a flight to America to see a friend I made via the web. Got a fantastic deal through a website and saved hundreds of pounds.

-Succumbed to social networking and had a Myspace page until the Facebook revolution happened (I was a fairly early adopter). Also started using Deviantart.com to post my photography for commentary.

-Posted a comment to an article on the BBC news page about foxhunting. Got into a heated debate with friends online through Livejournal.

-In 2004 I got onto World of Warcraft (before it was cool). I then left before they started getting celebrities to say they played it.

-Started using Pandora.com around 2005 (intelligent music streaming from America). Free music and recommendations.

-2008 I got a 750gig hard drive and began to download films, music and entire TV series. Opened up my viewing habits and began to see more live music and films as a result.

-Got a Twitter account after talking to Paul Bradshaw in my interview to start at BCU.

-Got the web on my mobile. Portable web use!

-Used the net to register my new home address when I moved, change driving licence details, order pizza online and check the local traffic status.

Things I’ve not taken up?
I’ve used pretty much all the new technology available to me to enhance my lifestyle. I’ve not really taken up any service that requires paying for (possibly cause I’m poor and there’s free services available to me).

Digitally excluded?
Can’t think of any time when I’ve been left out for not using technology. I’ve embraced anything of worth to me before it could leave me behind. I grew up with the internet as it evolved on a meaningful level.

I use it as a social tool to enhance my communication, a media consumption platform and as resource of information. I could certainly get by without it, but my daily life would require changing to find new sources for resources I previously found online.

Internet & popular culture?
I often find that popular culture lags behind myself and other early adopters of services. In a self-reflective view I quite like the elitist position of knowing you caught onto something before others.

There’s a certain satisfaction/disgust when you see the mainstream media reporting on something you’ve been using for years. It’s also annoying when some second grade reporter does a factually wrong article on something you know more about.

There’s a great diagram on the web that explains elitist behaviour. The circle on the right is stuff the general public like. The one on the left is stuff I like. The overlap in the middle is stuff I no longer like.

This is mainly because when the masses start to like something they tend to pervert its original purpose, the value I derive from it is cast aside and mutated into something else by the new users.

How is this relevant to popular culture? Popular culture lags behind the net savvy and we digitally exclude people until they catch up. The only issue is when they catch up, they often pervert the way things are used e.g. Twitter is used by every man and their dog and is now plagued with spam due to it’s rise in popularity.

In 1997, when I was 9 we had our first computer and it was Windows 95. I remember us all sitting around the computer looking at it like it was about to do something amazing, it never did. It wasn’t until about 1998 though that we had the internet. Back in the day when it was dial up and you had to pay for what you used. I didn’t really use it much because to me it was just something else that you could do your homework on and I already had Microsoft Encarta, happy days.

It wasn’t until about 2003 when I was 14 that I really started to use the internet and that was basically for MSN, which I used to talk my friends from school who I had just spent all day with. The internet was still on dial up so my mom and dad had to limit my time on there ‘in case anyone was trying to ring’. As soon as they were out of the house I used to get on the computer, I always got found out though because they would ring and hear the engaged tone.

Not long after that it wasn’t dial up anymore and you only had to pay a certain amount a month for your usage. I remember using it more and more for different things such as eBay and Amazon, I remember buying some books off Amazon for college. In about 2006 I made a website for my parent’s apartment abroad, I was studying ICT at the time and thought ‘yeah, why not?’ I brought a ‘create your own website’ CD from WHsmith and went from there.

So in 2007 when I was 18 I had an Apple Mac laptop which was wireless and thought it was great that I could use it anywhere. Until I went to uni and they gave me a wire to use the internet!!

Now at 21 the internet is something that I can’t really imagine not using every day for one thing or another. The internet incorporates so many things from games to socialising and everything has a website, if it doesn’t people don’t tend to trust it.

However, an intimate affair was not until 2001 and the first time I sat in front of a computer. My first encounter was in an internet café. The attendant took me through the process of setting up an email account and how to use the mouse. After that brief encounter I felt I had been fast tracked into the technological era. The internet café fees were so prohibitive which meant that the visits were far spaced.

My coming to the British Isles in 2002 facilitated the development of a closer relationship with the internet. I took a free European Computer Driving License course. This is when I also enhanced my surfing skills.

Around 2003, I was beginning to settle to life in U.K. and that is the time the internet moved in. Having internet in the house meant that I could experiment and through discovery means I was able to figure out how to get more out of the experience.

In the subsequent years the internet became integral to my lifestyle. The period coincided with the mass exodus of young people from my country and the internet has played a critical part in maintaining ties across the Diaspora. The advent of social media has also been instrumental in communicating with friends across the globe. The internet is engrained in my day to day living that even my religious activities are now mainly internet based.

My relationship with the internet has blossomed to the extent that I have progressed from being a mere consumer to a producer of web content and internet application. In 2008 I enrolled on a web-design course with a private course retailer. In the same year I got a university place to study Web and New Media.

However, like most relationships, my love for the internet is not without its discounts. I have grown to distaste some aspects of social media. I have developed the tendency to hold back on certain online activities like twittering.

Ah Windows 95, you beautiful freak, I do love you so. For it was you who was there with me as I first took steps into the internet, like a cloud filled pied piper leading me into the darkest depths of the world wide web.

For me, the internet started when my parents purchased a new PC that had W95 on it, and with that came Internet Explorer. This coincided with the release of Freeserve's (now Orange) 'pay as you go' internet package.

Imagine that now - paying as you go for usage of the internet. That would stop music piracy pretty quickly!

Of that time, I remember three websites standing out for me: Yahoo Chat, Mp3.com, and an IP address that was passed round school that linked to free hardcore porn.

Maybe I'll leave that third one and concentrate on the first two.

ASL? LOL :)

Before Facebook, Twitter and MySpazz, there were chat rooms. And in those chat rooms we chatted. And all the world was ablaze with debate. Topics such as "Clearly pop-punk is better than metal" and "Clarissa from 'Clarissa Explains It All' is WELL fit" flowed seamlessly like rivers of knowledge from the mouths of Gods.

Oh and everyone was 14. Apart from the paedophiles.

Then this odd trend of 'online girlfriends/boyfriends' happened.

I had one myself. Her name was Rosie, and she looked like this:

In my head.

In real life, she probably looked like this:

I know I did.

She wanted to meet up once, but that is simply NOT HOW I ROLL, instead she met up with a mate of mine, and they got on a treat, leaving me behind.

I never did meet her.

I AM A ROCK GOD

Anyone who ever speaks to me about music online will be punching themselves in the face at the mere mention of MP3.com. That's how much I go on and on and on about it, but I don't care, because I bloody LOVED mp3.com, and I always will.

Before Myspace, Purevolume, Reverbnation (insert endless list here), there was mp3.com. Imagine a website where you put in the name of a popular band, and a list of unsigned or smaller bands who sound like that band comes up for you to listen and download. But, imagine that in a world that is pure. A world that has not been tainted by SEO, "online marketing experts" and "social media strategies". Where bands want their music to be heard, and they tell the truth.

It was a beautiful place without discrimination. Music flowed freely and bands were discovered and loved. I put my own band up there, and on one glorious day in June, we held the number 3, 4 and 7 positions in the 'grunge' chart.

It was a simpler time that I will always miss.

Where are we now?

Well, I'd argue I use the internet no differently to how I used it before. Chat rooms have simply been replaced my Twitter and Facebook, the online girlfriend has been replaced by 'online contacts', and mp3.com has been replaced by a billion different music sites where I discover and share music.

That naughty IP address doesn't work any more though. And for that, I am eternally sad.