My good college try at a definition of “interactivity” is best explained in an attempted experiment.
I emailed a message to my Gmail account from my Yahoo account with the subject “obama” and the message “obama”.
When opening my Gmail I was greeted with my simple message plus some extras…
Show support for your candidate Order now while supplies last
www.shirtsrus2.shirtcity.com
Obama Homeboy, Obama Mama, Vote Barack Shirts Buttons Stickers Hats
www.cafepress.com/ObamaHomeboy
30-Second Poll.
Do You Like Barak Obama?
www.indpolls.com/barak-obama
"Obama for President 2008" Get T-shirts, Stickers, and Apparel
www.BarackShirts.com
Barack Obama '08 shirts, buttons, hats, signs, and more. Shop Here.
Thank you invisible Google-man who reads my mail and pitches lame Internet garbage on me!!!
This is just one understanding I formulated about “interactivity”. I definitely lean more to the intent in Downes & McMillan’s discussion when they stated, “Something about the computer-mediated communication is more one way then two way, when the participant has relatively little control, and so on” (pp. 173).
What I connected with, was the idea that we non-actively (some even unknowingly) interact with these algorithm based engines as they (fueled by the dollars of advertisers) actively pursue our activity by “suggestion”.
It is almost as if Google and Amazon act as the opinion leaders in a digital two step flow.
Anderson’s discussion of the Long Tail supports this. All of these “people who bought this also bought this” invisible-digital opinion leaders are quickly steeling our consumer dollars and attention from TV commercials, billboards, movie previews, and (in my case with Gmail) political adverts and steering our opinions more in our own direction by in the direction of “others who liked this liked this too”.
I think it is a very exciting idea.
1 comment:
"steering"="steer"
proofreading long sentences helps.
Post a Comment