Monthly Archives: October 2015

Media Tracking

social-media-monitoring

In today’s day and age, the use of media is an everyday part of college students’ lives. Whether the use of media is to utilize the internet to access an online textbook or see what your friends are up to on social media, media use is, if not appears to be, an essential part of everyday life and functionality. Recording my use of media for a span of forty-eight hours, I am able to track my media use and come to conclusions about this subject. First of all, the form of media I used the most was the internet in the form of completing classwork and my internship. Utilizing the internet to access an online textbook, use Roger Williams University cite “Bridges,” referring to APA citation websites, using the Roger Williams University Directory for my internship, and researching local charter buses also for my internship, I utilized the internet for academic or work purposes for a total of seven hours and forty-five minutes.

The form of media that I used the least (but still used) was e-mail. Mainly only opening email and quickly reading or instantly deleting them, in the case of SPAM, I did not spend much time using email at all. Using email only approximately twenty-five minutes within the forty-eight hour documented timespan, the majority of the reason that number is even twenty-five is because I need to draft and send a few brief emails.

The amount of time spent communicating with another person over media was about about two hours and five minutes. I spent twenty minutes of e-mail, forty-five minutes on the telephone, and about one cumulative hour or text messaging (Apple messaging, WhatsApp, and Facebook Messenger).

Regarding monologic media usage, I spent approximately two hours and fifty-five minutes on this form of media. This time was spent utilizing television for one hour and twenty-five minutes and listening to the radio on my commute to campus for a total of one hour and fifteen-minutes.

The thing that surprised me the most about my time spent engaged in the use of media was the amount of time I did not utilize social media. Within the forty-eight hour timespan, I only used social media (Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat) for fifty-five minutes. I think the reason why this number surprised me is because today, young people, including college students, are constantly portrayed as people who “cannot get off of their phones” and “always on social media 24/7” however I only engaged in social media for less than an hour in two days. On the flip-side, however, I was also shocked with how much time I spent engaged in work and classwork related media. I was not surprised by this because of the assumption that I would not engage in classwork outside of class however because of the large difference in time spent academic and professional internet use in comparison to everything else. While I spent over seven hours on the internet in order to complete tasks for class and work, the media platform that I engaged in the most following this was television, again only spending an hour and twenty-minutes engaged in this media.

Based on this exercise, I do not believe I will change anything regarding my media usage. To be honest, I was pleasantly surprised with the results I found during this media-tracking process. Noticing that I engaged in media primarily to benefit my studies and complete tasks at work through the internet, being a college student, I will attempt to keep my engagement with media this way.

The theorist that I believe best fits this assignment is Thomas Frank. Frank, as described by Sturken and Cartwright (2009) in “Practices of Looking,” argued the existence of counterculture in advertising in order to “make certain brands seem hip and cool” (p. 294). The idea of counterculture is what stuck out to me most. Describing counterculture as a “cutting-edge cool [that makes something popular] one month becomes uncool the next when a particular look or item goes mainstream” (p. 294). The way I connected Frank’s counterculture to my media-tracking was by analyzing the social media platforms I used when I was engaging in social media: mainly dominated by Instagram and Snapchat. If I were assigned to a media-tracking assignment two or three years ago,  however, the social media platform I would most certainly be using the most would be Facebook, for example. Because of the mainstream popularity of Facebook among older generations, I, along with what I assume to be the majority of young people, have engaged in active counterculture as I have moved away from Facebook and rather to other social media platforms such as Instagram and Snapchat.


Cartwright, L., & Sturken, M. (2009). Practices of looking: an introduction to visual culture. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc.


Creative Commons

CC-by-nc-sa

Creative Commons is an organization that values the legal sharing of creative work. Enabling the modification of copyright terms and licensing, Creative Commons gives the public access to view, share, and modify another’s work in ways that best suits the creator. This is to say that if a content creator only wishes to allow their work to be used by the public and not for commercial use, copyright terms are adjusted in order to protect both the creator and the person using the work found on Creative Commons. This platform for content sharing, stores a wide variety of mediums such as images, audio, video, and even academic material available for public and legal use.

Creative Commons allows a less ambiguous and safer understanding of ownership and copyright. Regarding the subjects and of a work, utilizing Creative Commons, there is a direct relationship between the content creator, or owner, and the person utilizing their medium. This platform that helps manage a middle ground between the two and allows for owners to share their content and those who want to use it on a permission-based relationship. Regarding copyright, I believe Creative Commons’ shift from “all-rights-reserved” to “some-rights-reserved” system of copyright also helps to create a safe space where people are able to use the content available and do not have to maneuver their way around copyright terms in fear of abusing an owners’ content.

This idea of varied copyright terms is a relatively new concept. In the case of Gone With the Wind, a work of Sherrie Levine and Michael Mandiberg, the copyright laws were extremely strict in comparison to the Creative Commons’ terms available today. These strict laws enforced that the duplication and modification of this work was clearly illegal and an infringement of copyright laws. If, hypothetically, Levine and Mandiberg were to released Gone With the Wind in modern day, the use of Creative Commons would allow copyright terms that were less strict and, for example, the creation of a sequel would not violate such laws.

Regarding the protection to the right of publicity, Creative Commons does not afford this. Any media form shared on Creative Commons is viewable and usable by the public. Because of the terms agreed upon by utilizing this medium, the right of publicity is not protected.

In the case of Bela Lugosi, the original actor of Universal Pictures
Company’s film Dracula, in which his death left question as to the licensing agreements of the character, copyright laws were questioned and challenged. In the year 1966, Lugosi’s widow and son filed complaints against Universal Pictures Company stating that they, as heirs to Lugosi, disapproved of the appropriation of Dracula and stated that any of Universal’s profit gain regarding these appropriations belonged to them. Creative Commons at this time, as stated before when discussing Gone With the Wind, did not exist however the current existence of this platform eliminates a number of copyright terms and issues, such as the Lugosi case.

Because Creative Commons is a space where content can be modified and used in various ways, the owner of content cannot predict what ways his or her content will be modified and construed. In Sturken and Cartwright’s (2009) text Practices of Looking, John David Viera is mentioned when discussing the emotional or meaningful attachment that can exist between viewers and content. Discussing Dorothea Lange’s photograph Migrant Mother, it is discussed that there is a blatant “lack of ability to predict and control the meanings and uses of [an] image as it is reproduced and circulated in different contexts” (Sturken & Cartwright, 2009). Whether this inability to predict future meaning is reproduced work is positive or negative is unforeseeable however Creative Commons allows for Viera’s ideologies of constant change to hold true.


Cartwright, L., & Sturken, M. (2009). Practices of looking: an introduction to visual culture. New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc.