In addition, I feel like the process of all research begins and ends much like his project to describe and create the city of Paris. Currently on my dying Macbook I have countless Microsoft Word documents with merely a paragraph. These paragraphs are comprised of ideas, notes, random musings, links between various articles I might use in the future. These documents would probably serve me much better on this space here, as they’d be more easily searched. I’ll have to begin to post here instead of going straight to a blank document.

I think my ideal dissertation at this point would deal with mapping the political landscape of the 2010 midterm campaign. McConnell has talked about restarting the contract with America. What would the contract look like? How do we know people are assenting to the contract? Glenn Beck and Keith Olbermann will continue to fight over ideals, rather than the intricacies of policies. How do we create the landscape they are creating for their listeners? I can map countless hours of their programming, but how do I create and justify the paths between the pundit’s ideas and their audiences? Everything is never said, Foucault once said, but then how do we know what isn’t communicated?

The purpose of this space will be to try out some ideas I will develop. Taking Jeff Rice’s advice, I will try to post on other blogs to get a greater readership and hopefully a greater of responses. So if you are still reading, let me know you’re here. Of course, you can lurk, but it’d be nice to know who’s out there.

However, there is also a sense of invention that Barthes provides for his readers. Barthes writes about the studium, which is defined as an “application to a thing, taste for someone, a kind of general, enthusiastic commitment, of course, but without special acutity” (p. 26) or a “kind of education (knowledge and civility, ‘politeness’), which allows me to discover the Operator” (p. 28). The punctum “break[s] (or punctuate) the studium” (p. 26). He eventually breaks up the punctum into two kinds; one of intensity and one of time (p. 96). The former suggests the “prick” that awakens the spectator to the image, whereas the latter emphasizes the noeme or “that-has-been” (pure representation). Although we may privately “glance over” (p. 106) the photograph and generate the likeness or aura of teh image (such as Barthes’ fondness of his mother’s childhood photo), we also could have a more public reading that emphasizes the studium of the photo.

His discussion of surprises is also interesting on p. 32. I wonder what Barthes would have to say in today’s world where photographs are constantly being questioned for validity. Was that Image photoshopped? Does Photoshop give us the space to invent, as we tend to combine painting (removal of red eyes) with the capturing of a moment in Time?

New forms of community are emerging (p. 27)

Spoilers engage in a sort of play (p. 29)

Levy’s vacilates between fully knowledge sharing communities and stable ones (p. 38).

Game played between media conglomerates and viewers (p. 48); as well as between posters (p. 50) [also in the matrix, p. 97]

Expert paradigm is comprised of bounded knowledge achieved through particular processes, which one can master (those that are on the inside), whereas collective intelligence is open ended and interdisciplinary in a space in which everyone can participate  in a undisciplined manner. Experts also need credentials, whereas the collective needs to prove itself (p. 52-53).

“because they are voluntary, people do not remain in the communities that no longer meet their emotional or intellectual needs (p. 57).

interests of producers and consumers are not the same (p. 58)

difference in “real-time interaction” and “asynchronous participation” (p. 59)

trans-media franchise (p. 61)

affective economics “a new configuration of marketing theory, still somewhat on the fringes but gaining ground within the media industry, which seeks to understand the emotional underpinnings of consumer decision-making as a driving force behind viewing and purchasing decisions” (p. 61-62).

new marketing efforts seek to establish a long term relationship with the consumer (p. 63)

“impress me” (p. 64); McLUhanist engagement

“expression charts” (P. 68); engagement and loyalty to a TV program (p. 68)

brand extension should not be contained within a single media platform (p. 69). Media + Vine

Zappers, Loyals, and Casuals (p. 74).

Serialization (p. 78)

consumption communities work like Levy’s knowledge communities (p. 80)

gossip in communities is way of connecting with others (p. 84)

link between advertising and content (p. 88)

develop communities strategies to ensure fairness (p. 91).

Filmmakers provide clues that “won’t make sense until we play the computer game” (p. 96)

cultural activators prevent closure too quickly; matrix as transmedia storytelling (p. 97)

Eco and cultural artifacts (p. 99)