The Switch to Digital Television - Essay Example

DIGITAL TELEVISION TECHNOLOGY By The Switch to Digital Television Introduction Digital media are the one of the concepts that has gained popularity in the globe because of the quality of output produced and the amount of income that it continues to generate for those that use this technology forum. Over the years, digital media have diversified in the audience ranging from those using them for communication or for broadcast, hence changing the way that producers and their audiences relate. For instance, producers of digital media gadgets have had to manufacture their products with the needs of their audiences in mind, hence explaining why this has become a profitable industry. Further, digital technology and media allows for their use at any place, time and in the way that a user desires, making this to gain popularity in usage across the globe. Initially, digital media began as a tool for viewing, but it later found use in areas such as research, writing, shopping, voting, reading, playing among a list of other functions that are relevant in today’s world. Behind the success of the digital television, is a labour force that works tirelessly to ensure that the audiences achieved do not fail to receive their content on time and within the quantity that they desire. Many have viewed the digital world as a creator of virtual sweatshops that have enslaved a significant number of those with the knowledge of this technology because of the much effort that they put in. With this, this essay will delve on the detailed ways in which the digital television has transformed the producer-audience relations in terms of audience participation in generating content. Further, the focus will also be in the labour force that gives strength to the new cultures of the digital media industry and the ways in which it has affected production cultures, economics, and the practices of this industry based on Tiziana Terranova’s essay. Advantages and disadvantages of digital technology In this text, the author argues that digital technology has provided a platform for the utilization of free labour to the audience as minimal benefits go to those that produce them. Essentially, many view this as a possible way of economic exploitation because the amount of labour that goes into developing these digital platforms do not meet the expectations. For instance, piracy is one of the voices that has continued to grapple with the technology world because it allows for the access of information and digital products with ease without having to pay for the efforts of the producers. This means that the audience that uses these tools do not factor for time or resources that went into developing the products available online hence making their efforts to be unrewarding. Further, this also creates a degradation of the knowledge that digital media users may have because internet platforms can create enslavement. Mostly, this occurrence is common in developed economies that are capitalist in nature in which their main aim is to make profit at whatever cost without factoring in the effects that this form of trade may have on those involved. The implication of this it that internet player have engaged in producing products aimed at their audiences rather than those tailored for their needs making this to be a socially related aspect. Other than working on the internet to provide labour, reading and the involvement of audiences in mailing lists has also become a form of free labour provision despite the fact that this is a voluntary practice (Terranova 2000, p. 33). Using this as a basis, analysts have viewed this as a postmodernism form of slavery that is more virtual than physical in which proving this exploitation in a court of law becomes challenging. The challenge lies in proving that the digital media has influenced forced labour on a user or developer through the many humanistic theories that exist. On the contrary, the expansion witnessed in the digital world has also influenced some positivity towards the society as it has helped in the establishment of flexible labour options for many. The idea that a user may do so at the comfort of their homes has made this media tool to be popular among both the intellectuals and the not-so learned. However, this stands at a disadvantage because the access of this media tool to everyone makes it hard to target a particular fraction of the population because this technology is limitless and is available in many global languages. The one that benefits the most out of this is the audience or the recipient of the information aired on this channel because the only fee that they pay is that by accessing the digital television. On the economic front, the digital television has also cut down on the middlemen involved in advertising transactions as manufacturers of goods inform a wider audience directly without having to incur any marketing expenses. Therefore, the digital television somehow renders a fraction of the population unemployed despite the fact that it is a cheaper way of passing information and marketing to a global audience. From an economic perspective, this scenario is relatively similar to the Marxist thinking in which one has to lose in order for another to gain as the digital television cuts down on marketing options while also decreasing on the establishment of physical locations for trading. In other words, the society has come to rely on the virtual world more because of the convenience attached to this usage and the amount of information that an individual can access at the click of a button. The implication of this is that the digital television has dished out, more power to the society, making the population to be at the centre of control than any other stakeholder. In this regard, the digital television has created a culture that has links with technology in that the society has become interdependent on the digital tools that favour their desires hence advancing the fact that the world has become a capitalist village (Terranova 2000, p. 34). The rift has also widened between consumption and production because those providing the labour are dissatisfied with the returns generated because they are not as profitable as they should be. Digital media developers have also had to sacrifice a lot in order for this field of technology to grow, making them to be more of Marxist workers. However, not everybody in this food chain is a loser because of the amount of labour that they put in because others have reaped heavily from the benefits associated with this platform hence strengthening the relationship between the audience and the producers. Capitalism and the internet Over the years, technology and the internet have created a utopian ideology that both of them are the nervous systems for functional economies and they are relevant sources of capital. However, the internet has a downside in which users have to pay in order for this service to work for them meaning that applying capital is key. The internet is also an innovative tool for advertising, which means that those with knowledge of online advertising have to constantly work towards improving their outputs because of the high competition involved. The stakes are high in this industry, meaning that only the innovative minds can stay afloat in this business because inadequacy in labour and improvement on quality leads to poor advertising. On the other hand, the internet has also influenced the thinking that those that do not use it do not fit in the elite bracket hence making society to work hard to access it. In many developing nations, economists use the internet as a benchmark for analysing the economic prospects of a country rather than education. Therefore, the notion created by this is that non-internet users are insignificant to developer because they may not possess the knowledge required in order to make decisions for the society. Essentially, the internet has created a stereotypical attitude in the society as the internet and digital media users are the latest addition to the perceived elite in a population (Terranova 2000, p. 39). Internet usage as a way of accessing digital television, varies in terms of gender, income levels, and race among a list of other demography hence making it necessary to evaluate these aspects before ascertaining on the impact on the digital economy. However, the challenge lies in establishing a valid connection between these classifications and the knowledge of those involved in internet usage because this is a misleading interpretation. Knowledge can be a form of capital in a society, but this does not necessarily require that one fraction of the population to have priority before another when accessing it. The obvious implication of this is that knowledgeable workers need not be of a particular race, gender, or class in order for their contribution to be valid. Labour is an aspect that cuts across all these dimensions as the common factor shared is the income generated out of this venture through the labour inputs made. According Lazzarato, an Italian economist labours, is a two dimensional aspect where one side relies on the skills applied and the other on activities aimed at redefining the artistic standards (Terranova 2000, p. 41). In essence, skill is a factor that needs constant nurturing in that an individual has to work on the craft that they have in order for them to remain relevant in their practice. In the same manner, digital media developers work hard at refreshing their skills and applications, making it to be a renewable form of capital that is hard to maintain. This means that those employed go through continuous training while also working on their internet projects, hence making their labour application to be high. Knowledgeable employees that fail to upgrade their skills become similar to the unemployed because of their lack of commitment towards advancing their acquired capital. Using this as a basis, the internet creates immaterial labour because of the time spent in accessing sites and chatrooms because producers still manage to drive revenue in a creative way. For the users, they may not realize the amount of time that they spend on the internet, but this may be to their disadvantage if they do not use this tool to advance themselves. In some cases, users consume the internet without generating any gainful exposure or deriving any form of profit, but for others it is their way of thriving. However, the digital usage culture should grow to include the options of using this as a possible investment tool in terms of time and capital. The digital economy The term digital economy began as a way of summing up the activities on these technological tools in terms of trade and communication in postmodern societies. In essence, a digital economy requires the intersection of newer technological aspects and the emergence of workers with digital knowledge in order to establish a productive craft. In developed economies, this aspect may require government funding in matters education and in areas of research in relation to technology, which analysts believe to have been the cause the present shaped internet (Terranova 2000, p. 35). Remarkably, the digital economy is a revolutionary way of trading as it creates network communities where people can interact freely without having money as the basis for the contact. Ideally, the concept of digital economies has gained momentum because it is non-restrictive to distance, geographical states, or culture hence making it to be a global aspect. In this form of trading, the focus lies in the needs of those involved in this virtual trade instead of certain restrictions such as trade rules or taxation, which tend to be last aspects within this free trade. Here, information sharing is at no cost with the interest being on the facilitation of smooth trading without factoring in matters such as copyrights or overstepping on information available to the public. Some economists have reviewed this concept as one that seeks to replace capitalism and somehow irrelevant because it does advocate for competitiveness as a way of influencing trade and the provision of quality products. Others view it as a possible way of re-introducing communism because those that seek information on matters of their interest receive it with ease through the efforts of others, which is a way of promoting free labour. In essence, this is considered a free exchange of time and information at no advantage to the issuer of these two all in the name of good will and promoting trade within an internet networked community (Terranova 2000, p. 36). Therefore, loyalty here lies in the perceived internet community rather than to a state or to a company, which is a dangerous way trading because it can be damaging to an economy. This is more of a social approach because the shared desire is to achieve cultural production where in many cases gives rise to overexploitation of the knowledgeable workers. In essence, those have a wealth of knowledge on matters internet find themselves dishing out information to those in need of it at no cost as this is the acceptable way of doing things. As much as this practice tends to communal, it is the most advisable because it allows knowledgeable workers to give their all in technology matters that they are passionate about. The beneficiary of this is the recipient or the audience as they tend to receive the best outputs because a developer specialized in delivering quality and as per the needs of the market. The implication is that a digital economy can also rely on globalization aspects as this helps in the gaining of knowledge from other parts of the world that are relevant to this practice. In this context, a worker or producer achieves fulfilment in their work because this gives them the opportunity to enrich themselves to the benefit of the consumer (Terranova 2000, p. 38). According to research, managing a knowledgeable group of workers is a challenging aspect, but the only way towards influencing productivity is by allowing them to practice what they know best. Conclusion In summary, using digital television as a platform reaching out to audiences is a challenging venture, but the results achieved are far much more despite the labour application involved. Many producers put in extra hours to ensure that the contents gets to the audience in time as much as they may not appreciate the efforts made. Ideally, the digital world is a virtual world that links global citizens to a networked community that allows for the dissemination of information fast and at minimal cost. However, an economic view at this scenario illustrates that digital television tends to overwork people while also cutting on the number of marketing brokers in this trade. Users are also able to access the content that hence applicable to them allows producers to specialize in generating products that would maintain their audiences and increase traffic to their sites. However, digital television disadvantages those that lack knowledge in this field, meaning that they may lack job opportunities and also the privilege to access these contents. On the contrary, the digital platform is an avenue for growing economies because of the influence it creates on internet usage and allowing for other investment opportunities. In the end, the audience has become more active as producers have had to shift interest from matters that suit them to those that their audiences relevant to them, hence changing the initial approach to this aspect. Bibliography Terranova, T 2000, Free labor: Producing culture for the digital economy, Social Text 63: 18(2), pp. 33-58. Read More