In this essay we will answer to what extent are ‘new media’ actually new? The definition from the Oxford Dictionary of media is ‘the main mean of mass communication (broadcasting, publishing and the internet) regarded collectively.’ Starting this by showing the arguments with literature reviews and theoretical contexts of Lev Manovich, Jay Bolter, David Grusin, Meenakshi Gigi Durham and ”Douglas Kellner. Then three different case studies that will enforce some of their arguments; firstly Cameras, the evolution of news distribution and finally virtual reality. These arguments will support the idea that new media is not as new as people think. New media can be defined as a mix of different media technologies but still have the same form as old media just with improved technologies such as digital technologies. This definition supports the thesis as it shows that media isn’t really new but just an improved version of it.
In Durham’s and Kellner’s chapter about alternative and activist new media genre framework, they argue that new media is a combination of features and capabilities from different types of media. They also explain that new media is ‘information and communication technologies and their social context'(Durham, M., & Kellner, D, 2012, p474) made from three main components. Firstly there is the devices and hardware that make communication possible, then there’s the actions people engage in to do so and lastly the organisations created to run these operations. In their eyes ‘new media (like other communication technologies) can be defined as the combination of material artifacts, people’s practices, and the social and organizational arrangements involved in the process of human communication'(Durham, M., & Kellner, D, 2012, p477) as well as they explain that recombination, network architecture, ubiquity and interactivity are the four factors to make media new. The idea of ubiquity isn’t completely valid. If we take the example of Fitbits they don’t actually appear everywhere, in certain parts of the world they are uncommon but it doesn’t stop Fitbits from being new media. So ubiquity isn’t a factor everywhere in the world. Also they argue that interactivity is only found in new media but we have had interactivity since the beginning of media for example jump scares in celluloid cinema. But if we agree that interactivity is a defining part of new media then it helps argue that new media isn’t as new as we thought it was if it was present during celluloid cinema.
Jay Bolter and David Grusin have two main arguments in their book. The first being that new media isn’t actually new it’s just an improved version of other media. They argue that ‘What is new about new media comes from the particular ways in which they refashion older media and the ways in which older media refashion themselves to answer the challenges of new media.'(Bolter, J. & Grusin, D, 1999, P15). Secondly they explain that ‘new and old media are invoking the twin logics of immediacy and hypermediacy'(Bolter, J. & Grusin, D, 1999, P5) and how they depend on each other to remediate old media. So what you see in front of you is associated to what you can actually do with it. It. Is also mentioned that both immediacy and hypermediacy were present with classic art and even before that (Bolter, J. & Grusin, D, 1999, P11-12). Their arguments agree with the thesis in that new media isn’t as new as people thought and that the twin logic has always been present the only thing that has change is that it’s improved and made easier with the technologies we have today; and ‘new media might be here slowly changing our user habits, but old media never left us.'(Parikka, J, 2013, P3)
Lev Manovich argues that media became new when the two trajectories of the Daguerreotype and Babbage’s Analytical Engine advance into modernity (to the Lumi”res Cinematography and Halleriths Tabulator) and then merged together. So ‘the translation of all existing media into numerical data accessible through computers’ (Manovich, 2001,P20) is the creation of new media. In his book he explains five principles that define new media. The first is numerical representation; new media is programmable and made with digital codes. Then there is modularity; when the components of new media like the binary codes are broken down and translated into something we understand (like a digital image). The third is automation which is to modify any media automatically through programs. Then there is variability ; the possibility to chose and change something according to what the individual decides. Lastly transcoding which is when media is converted into any other type of media or format. Manovich shows that new media isn’t recent and goes back to the creation of digital data recording and computers. The aspect that differentiates old media and new media is that we can edit it easier and program it. But this was still possible to a certain extent at the beginning of media.
A good example of media is cameras and a common argument people use to say that only the very recent cameras are new media is their size, saying that cameras were really big and took up a lot of space. However back then big cameras like the Kinemacolor cameras (1) were reserved for professionals and if we look at professional cameras today like the Canon XF400, they are the same size. Then there is portable cameras which were also quite small back then for example the Kodak Petit camera (2). It is also said that new medias are more customisable with covers different colours but if we look once ore at the Kodak Petit camera it came in different colours and also came with matching accessories like lipstick. One thing that has changed is they have become digital cameras, which makes images in a numerical format to be used easily on computers. This brings up Manovichs principle of numerical representation, but one of the first digital cameras came out in 1975 (forty three years ago) which isn’t as recent as people tend to think new media appeared. Animation and filters in other words editing is on of the defining aspects of new media. Except this concept isn’t actually recent. George Albert Smiths lenses (1) are made to perceive the image as if you are looking through a magnifying glass or the other lens through binoculars. That is the beginning of animation in film. Animation started to appear in 1832 with phenokisticopes and kineographs, so the idea of animation is even older than we think. The filters were stained glass placed in front of the lens to change the colour of the image. So even if Manovichs definition is correct the roots and creation of new media was present from the beginning of media of even before it. The only thing that has really changed is that all of the image and film editing is done digitally. Media has evolved with time but the ideas stay the same.
Another good example would be the distribution of the news. Today we mostly view the news on our phones with different applications which is a big change from newspapers in 1605 when it was official printed by Johann Carolus. However the information stays the same in newspapers and online news, so the concept stays the same. Newspapers are as editable back then as online news apart from the task of publication is easier now with a click of a button it is defused online. People can argue that online news (on phones starting from 2008) is new media thats not the first new media of its type. Before online news there was televised news and before that there was the radio. Which brings up Manovichs principle of transcoding (using a computer layer to transcode and transfer the human voice on a cultural layer) and modularity, which makes radio broadcasting new media, this started in the 1920’s which is soon going to be one hundred years ago. So new media isn’t all the media that is created nowadays, media even in the 1920’s counts as new media. Another thing that newspapers and online news have in common is fake news. For example in 1935 the New York Sun published several articles about proof of life on the moon or In 1844, anti-Catholic newspapers were falsely accusing Irishmen of stealing bibles. This hasn’t changed today, fake news is still used to influence people into thinking badly of something or someone or influence their votes for elections.
Then there is virtual reality. Virtual Reality is a mix of different types of media which is one of the defining concepts of new media, it has a mix of cameras, animation, 3D, computers, gyroscopes and sensors. It originates from the stereoscope (3). The stereoscope is the beginning of 3D, you would be able to see your pictures in a 3D like way. You had to manually remove each image and replace it with the next one. It evolved in 1939 with the view-master which used the Kodachrome colour film to make small and good quality pictures, it was modernising and becoming more popular. Still it wasn’t digital nor was it really programmable. It became digital and programable when it was merged with a computer for 3D games or films. The true beginning of was with the Sensorama which would let the user watch a video with different dimensions giving it sense of reality, it was launched in 1962 and brought out the four senses ( touch, smell, sound and sight). This is really the begging of 4D but the real beginning of digital virtual reality was with the Sword Of Damocles which had the same concept of virtual reality and It was created in 1968. The Sword Of Damocles is just an improved version of stereoscopic images, a mix of different types of media and is programmable, which according to Manovich qualifies as new media. This idea was work on for years and products came up like the Virtual Boy by Nintendo in 1995. So the virtual reality we have today the first new media of its kind. Contradictory to what we think the concepts of products today aren’t as new as they are thought to be.
To conclude, with the different books we have determined that ubiquity and interactivity aren’t qualifying factors for new media , that new media is a mix of different types of media and is programmable. Virtual reality, the distribution of news and cameras (film and pictures) all show that new media isn’t as recent as people think, as well as new medias built today aren’t necessarily the first new media of their kind. Media is advancing with the new technologies created, so their technological aspect change but their principles and idea stay the same from the beginning of media till the media we have today. When we discuss new media not being as new or recent as we think, is it the same for all technologies are they not as disruptive and as new as we think? Are new technologies just a mix of other technologies and an improvement of older technologies?