Foremost, the Editor. That bottleneck of conscience that judged a story for newsworthiness and accuracy. The mentor that taught technique and ethics. The Editor maintained journalism’s integrity.

Secondly, the Photograph as Editorial Art. Apparently if it’s not free, it’s not worth having in the new media.

More than anything, these characterize the new media for me. A lack of integrity and art. It’s like watching the Olympics devolve into professional wrestling on “Open Ring Night.”

This discussion parallels the issues raised by Existentialists about “I think therefor I am” of “what is I, thinking, and ‘am’.” We need to understand the basic concepts which these ideas are based on.

As for “new” I define it as “newly created and emerging” within the past 25 years, roughly the past generation. This allows the inclusion of the internet, which was created over 30 years ago, as well as video games, which are also ‘created’ rather long ago.

The issue of going with “newly created” is that all of these recent technologies are derivative and evolutions of past technologies, so it’s not very effective to state that a completely new standalone paradigm has been created across multiple mediums; as much as they have “grown” out of the past.

For Lev Manovich’s definition, none of his examples is signs of “new” media effects. Transcoding was done by Nikola Tesla WAY back for the first phonograph recordings, modularity applies to any complex device including the automaton wooden toys of ancient times in China and Greece, variability is everywhere in nature, and finally cultural transcoding has happened with every new evolution of mediums of expression such as accessibility of news from the creation of the newsprint press. These examples are a great list of what new media has HELPED happen, but not a solid way for defining it.

For example, the newspaper. That was really the first form of media. Major I mean. Please correct me if that is wrong, but it works for this. So when radio came out, there was a New Media for newspapers. In that news reports were then broadcast over the radio waves instead of captured in print. The same happened when television came out. There was once again a new media for newspapers/radio news, this tim it was broadcast in video format.

Each of these changes is a New Media Revolution. This is what is happening now with media. Just take this blog, it is on the New Media Revolution track.

It was not long ago that the traditional forms of media such as the television could only be picked up in the country that they were being transmitted. Now we have satalite TV reaching a huge audience, worldwide. It is connecting people in ways and giving us common topics to talk about.

The other thing is that perhaps there are no ‘new’ games on the Internet – most RPGs are based on the traditional D&D rules, which were based on very simple rules of play from earlier games – however; this does not mean that the ‘medium’ has not changed. People in WoW are connecting with others accross europe/america that they would never have met before, they are picking up on each others linguistic styles, grammar, and other languages not just 1337 speak!

The *medium* has changed, 2,3,4-way communication can be had (the prime minister of the UK has his own youtube channel where the public can ask questions and get a personal response), and games are now ‘emmergent’ (the outcome of a task is unknown it depends on the people involved and their roll in the game).

Many people feel more connected, they feel that their stories ‘can’ be heard. They don’t have to mass produce and ship their personal diary to America. We can read the same news story on elpais.es and on bbc.co.uk we can see the two countries newspapers different takes on a story.

The ‘medium’ changed because of the technology which drives it. The ‘media’ just got bigger, it got easier to participate in (for those on the power grid).

Thank you so much for your cooperation.