Interactivity is a term that covers so many areas of communication that it is tricky to define. Because of this I have turned to the Oxford English Dictionary for a clear definition. It states that interactivity when considering in terms of new media is “allowing a two way flow of information between it (a computer of other electronic device) and the user, responding to the users imprint”. From this we can understand that any type of computer/computer program or website is a form of interactivity. As long as the user has total control towards the flow of information.
Dance’s Helical Model of Communication was one of the first models that attempted to express the interactive nature of communication. (Rafaeli, S) The model is drawn as a downward spiral to represent that communication is continues, unrepeatable, additive and accumulative. Rafaeli disagrees that interactivity as communication can be summed up a simply as spiral shape suggesting that interactivity is “something beyond an illustrated metaphor”. The term interactivity is greatly unclear in terms of new media, but what is very clear is that interactivity plays a vital role in the everyday life of the consumer in which I argue and been seen as both positive as well as negative.
Take the recent Obama campaign for an example of political interactive success. $8million was spent on digital advertising through various search engines and news sites, which ultimately changed politics and mirrored the campaign by J.F Kennedy’s medium of television in 1961. Arianna Huffington, editor The Huffington Post explains that “if it weren’t for the internet, Barrack Obama would not be president, if it weren’t for the internet Barrack Obama would not be a nominee”. By using web 2.0 interactive tools such as iphone apps, YouTube and even text message campaigns Obama would be able to organise his supporters and make them engage with Obama as a real person and not just the first black person to be president for American publicity. This is an example by which the consumers themselves can take control through their own social media as a type of interactive army all set on a goal. We now live in the age of digital communications and anyone who is benefited with this technology has the power to change reality itself, even as high as political. But who is in fact controlling who? Obama? Or is it power to the people?
A recent example of a current campaign that plays on the interactivity of consumers is the Smirnoff ‘Nightlife Exchange’ competition which is an example of interactivity through a brand. This is a campaign which aims to Exchange nightlife experience of 14 different countries cultures. The UK is part of this process and is linked to a two way communication with Facebook in which Facebook users get to vote for the night to take place in their local city. This enables a powerful advertising tool of word-of-mouth which will take place over 14 different countries for this fantastic nightlife experience which will inevitably create a positive brand image towards Smirnoff. Below is the televised advertisement:
Lastly I would like to take the BBC’s Doctor Who, which became a failing television show with ever lowering ratings and explain that through pioneering interactivity of media channels, the BBC created a trans-media world in which participatory audiences had the “opportunity to engage in a rich and extended multimedia experience”. (Perryman N, 2008) the BBC’s aim was to create a buzz in the eyes of the public by having the program across different media channels which will in turn invite interactive communication. The BBC set up websites which list certain media such as mini episodes and blogging experiences of the show. Brooker (2003) states that this is an example of ‘television over-flow’. He defines this as; “The tendency for media producers to construct a lifestyle experience around a core text, using the internet to extend audience engagement and encourage a two-way communication”.
My argument is what is digital interactivity’s current impact on society? Do the public feel as though they are in total control in terms of how they what to control their media outcomes? Or in fact has producers simply tweaked the position in which they what the audience to follow, enabling the audience to become warped and controlled? It is clear that interactivity is becoming very popular amongst everyday life of the consumer. But what is not clear is whether the idea has been simply created to increase consumer enjoyment and positive values, or is it something a lot more complicated that that…
Leave a comment
No comments yet.
joesayer 
Leave a comment