The making of bangers

In my experience the best songs were never of original form, but rather an adaption which somehow always made it sound better, a remix. In our previous university lecture I felt as though I was in one of those lame “Try not to dance or sing” challenges on Youtube, like trying to keep your professional composure while bangers are hitting you left right and centre! And on top of that actually intaking valuable information, impossible! So, as you would, I decided to give it a try and this is what I was faced with: (the most impossible looking puzzle of my life)

Screen Shot 2017-04-21 at 8.08.28 PM.png


Did I figure it out in the end? Yes. Was it any good? Take a look for yourself

So so so so bad!!! Let’s pretend the glitch was on purpose ūüėČ


Remix made up of fragments and alterations of:

Macintosh plus X “13 Reasons Why” intro X “oh my god” girl X Skrillex & Rick Ross Purple Lamborghini¬†


Memes vs the world


What do these iconic images trigger within you? For some these are followed by a laugh, giggle or simply a written “haha”, but what if I told you that for some of the “more significant” governmental figures in our society¬†these mean war?! See for yourself:

Want to know more, heres a whole leaked document of the situation

Seems pretty ridiculous doesn’t it? Serious people talking about internet memes being a threat, but why? I think this all has to do with how much power they possess, perhaps the underlying power of how quickly they travel and spread, like a disease no one has a cure for! Memes¬†rule the world…literally.


Oh Trump

So in “the olden days” a public sphere was of a very simplified explanation, people talking (often turning to debate) about anything relevant at the time, positive or negative, even controversial. Back then there wasn’t ease in input, mostly due to stereotypical boundaries e.g. social class, but also because of the way in which they interacted (predominately verbally), but oh how times have changed! With the introduction of the new and improved mediated public sphere, thanks to the ¬†internet, anyone¬†is free to say anything no matter where on earth they come from. A really relevant and rather recent instance, would be¬†the fact that Donald Trump was running for president (spoiler alert: he won).

Boy were those hard times, not only because of the fact that DONALD TRUMP was RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT?!, ¬†but the amount of “input” which was exerted everywhere online, when I say everywhere I mean EVERYWHERE. You couldn’t miss it, and aside from the endless memes (examples below), parodies and comedic interpretations, there was serious talk, interaction and debate on the issue and outcome.


During the election, everything Trump ate, wore, said and most importantly TWEETED was highly scrutinised and for good reason too. Lets just say the public sphere was going absolutely crazy for Donald Trump and for the majority, not in a good way. Many debates like the one below were broadcast on what you would call a mediated public sphere provided by a public service broadcaster. Q&A are a very organised example of freedom of expression, who usually provide a fair balance of opinions, but from the captions at the bottom of the screen which reveal the audiences majority answers to a question (based on the topic), it was not balanced in this case.

The Q&A known for its¬†professional more tamed version of freedom of expression was nothing compared to social medias such as Twitter, where¬†there was no holding back on opinion. Twitter is a much more widespread instance in which people can literally say whatever is on their mind, no matter where they are in the world, compared to the very localised, Q&A. In my opinion Twitter¬†is the best depiction of the mediated public sphere in relation to the Donald Trump’s election saga, and the best part is, it still hasn’t stopped, take a look below:


Everyone is a journalist?

This weeks talk was based around the fact that the once passive consumers of legacy (old) media are becoming active producers of content between themselves, through the “newly” developed social sphere.¬†These social spheres allow for more decentralised discussions which have a many to many circulation rather than one to many source.

Citizen¬†journalism is¬†defined by the oxford dictionary as “the collection, dissemination, and analysis of news and information by the general public, especially by means of the Internet”. Often the simplest form of citizens journalism is undetected by its¬†producers, acts such as sharing posts, thoughts and “witness” footage of events on social medias like Facebook, Instagram and predominantly Twitter¬†makes you an unofficial “journalist”. Contrary to these accidental citizen journalists are those who participate in¬†websites such as “4chan” one of the more well known citizen journalist websites which aim to spread confidential information, with voluntary citizen journalists and their evidence so to say.

However, the real question is, can unauthorised and unedited public occurrences really be classified as journalism?


Fake News


The internet is a major enabler of talking trash, but perhaps¬†some of this “information” is notable. There has been so much more opportunity for people to speak their mind and rather than be told, they are telling, listening and reciprocating, differing opinions and views, with the help of these symbols (all gathered from my personal social networks):

Screen Shot 2017-03-29 at 10.04.13 PM.png

Now that the general public has power to speak their mind¬†on issues, there’s the potential for the “real news” to be outed on their lies. Rather than a “one to many approach” as in ¬†most legacy media, a “many to many” approach on social networks allows for communication between millions of sources providing validation from all over the world creating power in numbers, which for large media corporations is¬†highly intimidating.

Screen Shot 2017-03-29 at 4.19.25 PM.png

Anonymous Facebook Page

The first screen clipping of a user run Facebook page with over 7 million likes, informs users of news, not mentioned on mainstream media, compared with CNN one of the biggest culprits of producing so called “fake news” which focuses on one sided views.

Screen Shot 2017-03-29 at 4.19.41 PM.png

CNN News 



Who owns what we view?

Topic of this week: Who is it that runs the¬†media we¬†intake on a daily basis? Is there¬†many players or just a¬†single higher power? To be honest¬†the “who owns the media” topic has never really been one of interest, perhaps relating to my age? So I have basically taken this weeks post as a kind of “research task” ¬†to benefit my personal understanding, I will be focusing on my local media and who their stories are¬†influenced by.

Starting with print media, the most personally familiar written media outlet in the Illawarra is the¬†Illawarra Mercury. Originating as a newspaper the Illawarra Mercury now reaches approximately 70,000 residents daily, through their¬†website, mobile app, Facebook and of course its original printed format. I have also come to find that it is owned by one of the two major players in newspaper media, this being¬†Fairfax Media.¬† *As seen in the below¬†Youtube clip, the media has a way of swaying its viewers to believe that THEY are the ones who control what they watch, however is the timeline of news updates on devices, in the clip above evidence which portrays almost “brainwashing” ideals of the media? Thats a thought?!*


During this weeks tutorial we uncovered a web of information directing us to levels of media ownership, looking something like this:


Evident,¬†is a large concentration of activity directed¬†towards the Murdoch name, aka Rupert and his son Lachlan. However from what I could gather on this chart their influence didn’t necessarily affect the localised information I was receiving, but rather media players such as Kerry Stokes, Bruce Gordon and the Fairfax Media Limited¬†were. Upon further investigation I found that Bruce Gordon, owner of the WIN Television Network, a network founded in Wollongong had actually “gained control” of the network from Rupert Murdoch. This led me to wonder, did the “2 out of 3” law have anything to do with Rupert Murdoch’s withdrawal from our network and will the possible abolishment of this law lead to regained¬†control of our media¬†by the Murdoch name?

Screen Shot 2017-03-24 at 11.41.22 PM

I believe, if there is a change to this¬†law there is a risk of bias¬†opinion on all forms of media, especially if this power is in the hands of Rupert Murdoch, who is well known for “abusing his media power” and incorporating personal political opinion. Will the following stats¬†need adjusting?

Screen Shot 2017-03-24 at 8.47.10 PMScreen Shot 2017-03-24 at 8.47.00 PM


The most confusing concept

This weeks “confusing” lecture was in essence a bunch ¬†of¬†the new age of craft (digital craft) and since we have been “crafted” to overthink, we did just that,¬†overthought the meaning the content, not taking into account that the medium is the message?¬† ¬†The drastic¬†innovation of craft is one of flexible nature, virtually we can be, do or make anything we desire and often very unconsciously (hint:our major project/DA), we are all crafting online?!

Screen Shot 2017-03-21 at 7.30.17 PM

The process has everything to do with why it is considered a craft. An example of this would be Hatsune Miku, she is the result (or rather an ongoing digital craft process). Hatsune Miku herself started as a sketch, this is previously where the craft was done. The process of creating a digital craft e.g. Hatsune Miku, incorporates prototyping by not only one original creator but all habitants of cyberspace. Digital crafts make for infinite processes, they require experimentation and the introduction new forms of art (Gitch Art), anything you create you craft.Continuous crafting calls for communication of a message but more is gained from the process then the result, that is why the internet and digital craft is infinite. I think???

My VERY basic attempt at glitch art: