The Interactivity Impossibility

With growing research, it is difficult to see if the definition of "interactivity" is becoming more specific or ambiguous.  In the broadest sense, interactivity is simply any way to actively participate in the information-gathering process via new technologies.  This would be, for example, something as basic as clicking on a link or typing in a search engine.  A very narrow approach would classify only material that can be edited or able to provide feedback would constitute interactivity.  Kiousis defines interactivity as "the degree to which a communication technology can create a mediated environment in which participants can communicate (one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many), both synchronously and asynchronously, and participate in reciprocal message exchanges (third-order dependency)."

Often, Kiousis explains that "a condition is often called ‘interactive’ without considering multiple levels of the variable, let alone defining its meaning."  Most definitions, for example, assume that interactivity requires technology, but this technology can be either mediated or unmediated, between humans or from a human to a computer, etc.  Downes and McMillan describe the varying levels of these variables, citing dimensions like direction, time, place, control, responsiveness, and perceived goals that change its richness.  Basically, most computer mediated communication is not necessarily "interactive" or "not interactive" but higher or lower on the "interactive" continuum.

I tend to have a very ambiguous and all-encompassing view of the term.  In my own loose definition, I think interactivity is any way to communicate a specific message to a technology that would, in turn, communicate that message back to the user or to others - I suppose I see it as a branch of computer-mediated communication.  As media technology is becoming harder and harder to define and contain, it is becoming nearly impossible to create any kind of definition for what interactivity really is.  

The Long Tail has its hold on the world of interactivity by illustrating interactivity and "Web 2.0's" niche-fulfilling effects on information gathering and online entertainment as we know them.  As individuals become the source of information on websites allowing content to be edited and support feedback, specialized data can be found almost anywhere on any topic.  Interactivity like this allows millions of users to commune on one central platform and share messages and culture, and it allows businesses like Amazon.com to cater to these specialized preferences.  For example, by choosing key words out of e-mail accounts like "pizza" or "haircut," companies like Google can provide links to these sites, increasing interactivity and making a whole lot of money in the process.

In this way, The Long Tail absolutely has viable expectations for future business models.  Companies can continue catering to specialized interests that the user really can not get any other way.  For example, I was recently looking up polka music for a DVD I was making for my grandparents.  Nowhere else would I be able to find the Polish Wedding March in such a short amount of time (especially in Texas).  By clicking on a link, I was able to see user reviews of the CD it came from, detect which song was the one I needed (there are supposedly several "Polish Wedding Marches," listen to a few, download and play the song, and receive recommendations on several other artists.