Well, not quite ‘death’ but an indefinite hiatus. I’m powering down this blog for a few reasons, one of which is my desire to finish my PhD. I’ve tried for the last year and a half to do PhD writing and work and this blog, but found the mindsets are somewhat incompatable. I’ve decided therefore to close this blog down. I don’t know if I’ll bring it up again and if I do when, or whether I’ll start another one. But I do know that I have thoroughly enjoyed blogging here these past few years. I have especially enjoyed meeting many of you because of the blog, and seeing ‘cross-media’ (etc) projects become ubiquitous. Thankfully, the area has alot more people looking at it now, from alot of different perspectives. Here are some blogs that will keep you informed:

• Networked Performance: research blog that posts about emerging network-enabled practice;
• You can read and listen to news about alternate reality games and just about any online extension of a film, TV or book property on the ARGNet blog and ARG Netcast (podcast);
• Henry Jenkins personal blog and the Convergence Culture Consortium blog has lots of goodies from a media studies perspective about ‘transmedia storytelling’ and ‘convergence culture’ in general;
• DeMontfort University share their investigations into what they term ’Transliteracy’ at their PART blog;
• Jeff Gomez, the CEO of Starlight Runner and longtime practitioner of ‘trans-media’ projects, is now blogging regularly about his insights and experience over at the Producers Guild of America blog;
• Monique de Haas blogs about ‘crossmedia communication’ occasionally;
• Tony Walsh posts semi-regularly on alternate reality games;
• Valentina Rao blogs about crossmedia games and anything related to that at Games Across Media, and will hopefully be starting her PhD on the subject soon;
• Johnathan Gray, Derek Johnson and Ivan Askwith are blogging about everything around TV and film at The Extratextuals;
• Crossmedia Dialog is a group blog that post regularly on crossmedia in Amsterdam and worldwide;
• Faris Yakob, Adam Crowe blog about ‘transmedia planning’ and other changes to the marketing industry;
• Jak Boumans posts every single day about stuff happening in the Netherlands and worldwide at Buziaulane; 
• Max Giovognoli runs everything to do with cross-media in Italy;
• MobileCrossMedia is a blog that looks at the different ways mobile phones can network with different devices and the real world;
• If you don’t already get it, the Convergence Newsletter has regular interesting newsletters about convergence in journalism and has been my favourite newsletter for the past few years;

I don’t plan to be blogging here about events or publications I’m involved in, instead I’ll pop them on my bio site. But for now, here are some events I’m involved with, in the not-too-distant-future:

• I’ll be on the ‘expert panel’ with Mark McCrindle and Tim Flattery at Mitchell Communications Group ’s launch of ‘While You Weren’t Watching’, a documentary on changes to branded entertainment etc in which I was interviewed. The launch is private but the documentary will be put online I believe in Nov; 
• I have my own panel on ‘Designing, Experiencing and Analysing Games in the Age of Integration’, and I am a panelist in Darren Toft’s panel on ‘What Happened to New Media Art?’ at the Australasian Conference on Interactive Entertainment in Dec;
• I’ll be on the panel on ‘Cyber-Born Film’ at Megan Spencer’s Destination Festival (or DestFest) in Dec;
• In Jan 08, I’ll be a guest lecturer again for Sue Thomas and Kate Pullinger’s Online MA in Creative Writing and New Media, De Montfort University, UK;
• In Feb 08, my essay on ‘Tiering in Alternate Reality Games’ will be published in the special issue of Convergence edited by Henry Jenkins and Mark Deuze.

For now though, I will continue to be online in a different way. I’ve started a podcast, a podcast where I’ll interview talented people working in this area. My ‘birth’ podcast is a bit awkward, but the second is a great one: an interview with Stitch Media’s Evan Jones. At the site, I also provide sneak preview information about Stitch Media’s latest project.

That is it for me here, thankyou all for sharing this time with me. I’ll see you on the other side of my PhD.

Check it out: www.ChristyDena.com  

Check it out: www.UniverseCreation101.com

Check it out: http://www.scriptwritermagazine.com/

From Crackle: Script Cops, Ep 1: Domestic Disturbance

From Crackle: Script Cops, Ep 3: Traffic Stop

The point I’ve been championing is that tie-ins are not always conceived as exterior to the storyworld to those experiencing it. As I argued in my paper for How the Internet is Holding the Center of Conjured Universes (AOIR 06), there are definitely levels of authority placed on different works…but this is shifting. What this means for creators is that licensed works need to be creatively controlled in some way. The Wachowski Brothers did it with The Matrix: they enlisted comic and anime creators to expand their universe. Peter Greenaway did it with The Tulse Luper Suitcases: he (from what I’ve been able to garner) went out to companies and schools, shared his vision, and encouraged their own creations in response. Tie-in creations and their creators are elevated to acknowledged contributors of a storyworld.

I was thrilled, therefore, to find the International Association of Media Tie-In Writers (IAMTW), but then disappointed to find this post of their blog I Am a Tie-In Writer:

An author I know was recently taken to task by a disgruntled fan because a character in a tie-in novel mentioned visiting the Grand Canyon when, in a recent episode, the same character said he’d never been there. My author friend was surprised that a fan would care about such an insignificant detail. I agree with my friend…especially if you are writing book based on an on-going TV series. It’s virtually impossible for the books and the series to not contradict each other over little details. Publishing can’t keep up with production…in the time it takes for my finished MONK manuscript to reach the stands, an entire new season of MONK has been written and shot. I have no control over the content of the episodes that are conceived, written and produced after I have written my book. Which is why I added the following disclaimer to my Monk books:

“While I try to stay true to the continuity of the TV series, it’s not always possible, given the long lead time between when my books are written and when they are published. During that period, new episodes may air that contradict details or situations referred to in my books. If you come across any such continuity mismatches, your understanding is appreciated.”

Bottom line, it’s fiction. We are sharing characters in two very different mediums. The fans have to understand that these are characters in a fictional world…and relax. [Lee Goldberg, Canon Fodder, April 22, 2007]

Firstly, I wish to address the issue of the TV writing process. Goldberg is right when he says that the TV writing process as it stands cannot support continuity. Continuity will only occur with a massive restructing of the creation process. Mark Deuze has observed this in his book on the current state of media industries:

What I’ve found my research is, that under the banner of Integrated Marketing/Brand Communications and the shift towards full-service agencies a lot of work within holding firms has been overhauled, reorganized, and disrupted. To some, this meant increasing centralized control and monitoring of work, less attention to unique interests of the cultivation of specialized talent in favor of unified management strategies.

A way to manage the different interested parties has been put forward by Jesse Alexander, Executive Producer of Alias, Lost and Heroes at the 2nd Annual Hollywood and Games Summit, as transcribed at Wonderland:

Each group needs a transmedia czar or something, to connect the people behind the properties to the people creating the [new] content. You have to get the creators involved in that. I’m optimistic that that is happening at NBC.. They really regulate how the people who sell the IP out do that stuff..

What is also needed is creators who will be producing points-of-entry in other media and artforms to be brought in at the beginning. Note this comment by Julia London, who wrote a tie-in for the soapie Guiding Light (which Sam Ford has written about at the Convergence Consortium blog):

Even though the plot and characters were handed to me on a silver platter, it wasn’t easy to do, and in some ways, was harder than a lot of things I have written. Now that it is all said and done, I am glad to know that I have the chops to do something really different like a tie-in book…but I think I can safely say I much prefer creating my own worlds and characters. [source]

If creators were brought in at the beginning and felt as they were co-creators/co-initiators of a storyworld then perhaps the experience would be more fulfilling to them? Beyond this inclusive method of creation, there is a paradigmatic shift that also needs to take place. Note the (to me) frightening comment in Goldberg’s post:

Bottom line, it’s fiction. We are sharing characters in two very different mediums. The fans have to understand that these are characters in a fictional world…and relax. 

If tie-in writers think that the expansion across mediums means the work should be assessed and experienced differently then we have problems. It is perhaps another reason why transliterate creators and taking care of all of the points-of-entry in different mediums themselves. The mono-medium logic of tie-in writers is best evidenced in their logo:

I’m not saying that all writers have to become transliterate…just the ones that work in the business of creating cross-media worlds. Here is my counter pic, from my publishers presention. It does not include all the possible mediums, but it nevertheless includes books AND, AND..

In 2003 Henry Jenkins commented in his Technology Review article Why The Matrix Matters:

Most film critics frankly haven’t been willing to make the effort to “get“ this franchise because they are stuck within a mono-media rather than a trans-media paradigm–and thus, the second two films walk away with a row of Gentleman’s Bs. They can see something new is going on here but they really don’t know what to make of it.

The problem of a mono-media logic is STILL a problem with criticism, and as we’ve seen here, also with creators. 

Despite this rants, check out the yummy articles on tie-in writing on the IAMTW site.

Diffraction, the pilot title of Arts Council England Interact programme, offered placements to already established artists in innovative research and industry contexts for up to 9 months between the end of 2005 and the end of 2007. Aiming to unlock artists’ professional potential and demonstrate their vital contribution to the social, cultural and economic landscape, the placements offered inspiration and support to participants to continue to produce work that is challenging and innovative. A sum of £10,000 was allocated to each placement by Arts Council South West, with additional funds available for advertising, recruitment, project management, mentoring and documentation.

Hazel decided to do an ‘alternate reality game’ to specifically explore the narrative-possibilities of the genre:

In January 2007, Hazel moved into an office in Watershed and launched MeiGeist, an Alternative Reality Game created from the research undertaken as part of the residency. Blending fiction with reality by telling its story across different media including websites, text message, live events and email, 30,000 people around the world took part in the game which lasted eight weeks.

A report was issued with two parts. The first section includes feedback and observations as gathered by Watershed, and the second was ‘written by Hazel Grian, Jonathan Williams and Kenton O’Hara and summarises feedback and learning around the production of the game’. In the report, the difference between a commercially-funded and publicly-funded ARG is outlined:

ARGs have two main benefits for contemporary creative practitioners. They are conducive to multi-media,
multi-contextual expression whilst also having a commercial application. [...] We see therefore that MeiGeist, as the first ever publicly funded ARG, has unusually taken a form of innovative advertising and turned it into a piece of work for its own sake. An interesting question here is whether there are any real differences between the commercially funded and the publicly funded ARG. From the creative practitioner’s point of view, public funding for MeiGeist gave the makers a free hand in the content and time-scale of the project. MeiGeist reached a wide audience and the feedback shows they considered it to be a highly successful additional to the genre. This is very good news for those who supported the game financially. From a practitioner’s point of view it is obviously also very satisfying. However despite the great critical success of MeiGeist the producers have been left without anything to show financially for what was in effect a twelve-month project with global impact. Having said that, there is a postscript – the increased reputation gained from the game’s success has drawn in valuable commercial work for the producers. 

Another difference between a commercially funded and publicly funded ARG is the sharing of data and insights afterwards! The report includes data collected from 400 players through the following channels:

• MeiGeist Sign-up form – name, address, email, phone numbers.
• Sphere Research Institute (Eva’s fictional college) student enrolment test – in the form of a spoof
psychological questionnaire – contact details, marital status, personal/political interests and
opinions, reading habits and state of mind.
• End of game feedback form.
• Website activity statistics.

The report also outlines the role of the player-created meta-sites, points that support my arguments in my forthcoming paper about Player-Created Tiers in ARGs:

This documentation serves an important role in the experience that relate to the pragmatics of playing this and other ARGs. A good example here concerns the long timescale of the game and the fact that they are played out only once from a particular start date. For this reason, many players do not experience the game right from the beginning either through lack of awareness, practical constraints of getting involved, or through a deferred commitment to a game until it had received a sufficient stamp of credibility from other players on the ARG forums. Consequently as the game evolved momentum and credibility overtime, new players continued to join throughout its lifecycle. Joining the game in this way could be an arduous task given the complex and  distributed nature of the game elements and characters and the vast amount of player supposition accompanying the story. These meta sites provide an easier way in for new players to join in the game without getting bogged down in the forum history. Given the importance of player participation for everyone experiencing the game (whether actively or passively), the addition of new players is helpful for the ongoing experience of the game. A second example concerns the practicalities of time management in relation to playing the game in the context of everyday life. Following and contributing to the forums, visiting the chat room, accessing the web sites, participating with the characters and solving the puzzles can potentially consume a vast amount of time for any player. Even for the most dedicated player this time has to be managed. In the forums we saw examples of postings where people had been away from the game for a few days and unable to contribute due to work and family commitments. For more casual players, too, they would experience the game by dipping in and out of it.

Apparently Hazel is now working with Jan Libby, another talented ARG creator who was also snapped up, to work on Kate Modern (by the creators of LonelyGirl15). 

Some more info:

• Player-created Game Wiki
• Community gameplay @ Unfiction
• Hazel’s Journal @ Diffraction
• Podcast with Hazel @ ARG Netcast
• The report [PDF]

What if Charles Dickens’ character of Estella was not someone you met when you first read Great Expectations, but someone you knew from a social networking website such as Myspace or Facebook? In the simplest of terms, readers would be closer to the character if they have been exposed to them before. The narrative could then evolve to the point where readers felt as if they were reading about someone they know. Traditionally, readers come to know and relate to characters as the narrative unfolds. In the digital age, we want information and we want it fast. This old process may loose some readers simply because they don’t relate to a character soon enough. If the reader doesn’t relate to a character, then they may not care what happens to that character and lose interest.

Check out her post (if it is a her).

Joel and Cat Set the Story Straight is two weeks in the life of Joel Hedges and Cat Davis. Joel would prefer to get through his final year of high school without Cat Davis or his mother’s faux Spanish boyfriend and just hang-out with his best-friend Luke. Cat Davis has an annoying best-friend, and even more annoying little brother, and a deep abiding hatred of Joel Hedges.

Due to an unfortunate incident involving a leaking pen and suspected outbreak of Bird Flu, Joel and Cat are forced to sit next to each other in Extension English. To make matters worse, and to their mutual horror, they are paired together for a tandem story writing assignment. [source]

The story is delivered rotating between the POVs of the characters Joel and Cat and is linked by their tandem storytelling assignment; the writers, Nick and Rebecca, also wrote the story in a tandem storytelling style and the readers can also participate in the tandem storyelling assignment by submitting story threads on the website or SMS. The website was produced by IshMedia, which includes Kylie Robertson — the legend behind online & mobile interactive narrative works such as Jupiter Green (that I analysed for a journal), Girl Friday and Rock Chickz .

As I’ve said before, it is these sort of intimate and parallel media experiences that will increase over the next few years and will explore the potential of polymorphic narrative.

Check it out: http://www.joelandcat.com

Lesson #1: Avoid “convergence.”
Almost every piece of research that we studied in preparing these books detailed a specific definition of the term, “convergence,” but few of these definitions were the same. As with other generic terms such as “love” and “broadband,” the word “convergence” is used to convey meaning specific to the user, but these individual definitions may not correspond to those in the minds of readers. The solution we used was simple: Whenever possible, we attempted to replace the generic term “convergence” with a more specific, descriptive term, such as “crossownership,” “collaboration,” “multiplatform journalism,” “multimedia journalism,” etc. So, you might ask, why use the term “convergence” in the title of both books? As nebulous as it is, “Convergence” is a useful term to represent the wide range of ideas and behaviors that are changing newsrooms and the practice of journalism. Administrators know that they need “convergence” in their programs (even if they can’t define it), and send faculty to the Newsplex convergence training and to the annual conferences so that they can bring “it” back to their campuses. The term therefore remains useful as a catch-all. Consider, for example, the wide range of research described above for USC’s “Convergence and Society” conference in October, with sessions ranging from popular culture and regulatory issues to theory and the practice of convergent journalism.

The term “convergence” is appropriate term to identify this global set of processes and concerns, but it should probably not be used to identify a specific process in journalism or variable in research. I shudder every time I see a research project that directly asks whether someone is practicing “convergence”—the answer is invariably “yes,” but it is also invariably uninformative.

I totally agree and have been saying this for a couple of years now. ‘Convergence’ and ‘cross-media’ and to a lesser degree ‘multi-platform’ are terms that are employed in a wildly ranging manner. I was horrified when I first saw the programme for ‘Cross-Media Week’ last year. But now, after touring around Sweden, Finland and the Netherlands, I’m now aware of the misunderstanding. ‘Cross-Media’ is employed to describe just about any contemporary approach to entertainment. I think the organisers figured out the problem because they quickly renamed the event Picnic (which, I’m sure all my readers are aware of by now — the next one looks like a cracker!).

But back to the issue of polysemous terms. I often wonder why terms get out of control (as if they ever were). It seems that people employ the terms in a way other than how they are intended because they are not aware of another option (limits of awareness) and because of the need to be appealing (fear of not mattering to anyone). On the latter, the same problem has happened with ‘alternate reality games’ (ARGs). Many apply the term to a wide range of activities because they either don’t understand the unique characteristics of ARGs or if they employ it to ensure they gain attention from others. Everyone loves the flavour of the month. Who wants to know about a project that although it is well-designed is nevertheless a development of that which has already been? The fetish for the new. 

What do I do about the range of terms? I use different ones according to the audience I’m speaking to; spend alot of time trying to figure out what they mean when they use particular terms and try and educate people about the wider semantic d

Lesson #2: The Audience is Converged
Over the past seven years, the majority of research on convergent journalism processes and practices has focused on news production processes. But, over the past two years, the proportion of research devoted to the audience is increasing. Studies such as Ball State’s “Middletown Media Studies” have provided insight into patterns of consumer behavior across media. In my opinion, the most significant findings in these studies are the reports of simultaneous media use. One implication is that consumers aren’t as selective about which medium they choose as they are about content they choose to consume. One important impetus for multiplatform journalism and multimedia journalism is the fact that most consumers are significantly “converged” in their use of media, and journalists face the interesting challenge of playing catch-up with the public.

The increasing popularity of user-generated content is another dimension of the degree to which the audience may be considered to be “converged.” Increased attention to the role that a person’s media repertoire plays in how they glean information from the media is needed in both research and teaching.

Oh yeah, readers of this blog and perhaps more so people who attend my lectures are well aware of my rants about simultaneous media usage. Here are some posts where I’ve provided info on some of the research in the area: here, here and here. Research into SIMM helps content creators understand how people are using more than one media, when and which they are using for what; but it also signposts the future of cross/trans/multi-platform entertainment: where media will be employed in concert to create combined effects.

Lesson #3: Inertia is a Powerful Force – And Impediment
An examination of research on the wide range of processes described in the teaching and practice of convergent journalism indicates that changing behaviors, culture, and attitudes toward “other” media is a difficult process that is impeded by the inertia of existing systems. Faculty who have only taught (or have experience) in one medium (print or broadcast) are even more resistant to acquiring skills in “competing” media than journalists themselves. The irony is that the research also demonstrates that, once initial resistance is overcome, there is usually little problem integrating techniques specific to another medium within a reporter’s basic skill set of interviewing, writing, and editing.

Inertia is an impediment outside the newsroom as well. U.S. media are among the least converged in the world, for example, because U.S. media regulation maintains a substantial barrier between newspapers and television stations. Inertia is equally strong for the consumers discussed above, as any new medium or media outlet must overcome the inertia of habitual media consumption patterns in order to find a place in the consumer media repertoire. The lesson is that the inertia of existing practices is an important variable to consider whenever a change is contemplated at any level of convergence, through teaching, practice, regulation, and consumer behavior.

Well said! Inertia is a great way to describe the cognitive and workplace environments that function oblivious to the primal call of convergence. Indeed, I’ve found over the years that it really takes a few sessions with people before they ‘crossover’…have that epiphany moment when they suddenly understand it. But once they have that conversion moment the become proactive about learning more and creating for themselves. I like what Grant implies therefore: that interventionist activities are needed to ensure people and environments become integrationists.

Lesson #4: Start with a Strong Foundation
One characteristic that successful programs in converged journalism have in common is a focus on the basics:
Interviewing, writing, editing, verification, ethics, etc. Regardless of the type of convergence, these basic skills remain at the heart of the practice of journalism. The time and effort needed to teach medium-specific skills to a student studying multiplatform journalism is significant, but it much less important than the time, effort, and practice at these journalism basics.

Great! There is definitely a lack of these areas in the entertainment industry. Most industry events are big picture introductions with stats and menu-driven outlines of other people’s projects. What the industry is in dire need of is sharing of good integration design techniques. The problem is, many of the ones that really know their stuff don’t want to share  because that knowledge gives them a competitive edge. The other problem is there are many people who don’t think they need to understand the core mindsets that accompany integration design, they just want to mimic what is successful and hope for the best. I’m hoping my podcast will help provide some much needed discussion in the area of technique.

But I think I may of misinterpreted Grant’s point. I think he was saying that convergent journalism courses need to make sure they teach journalism as well as convergence. I see. But of course, journalism changes too in the convergent paradigm. Writing for convergence/cross-media/transmedia etc is a skill in itself…

These top-of-mind lessons are not comprehensive, but rather reflect ideas that are forefront in my thoughts after spending the past few years engulfed in the study of convergent journalism. My guess is that I’ll have a different list a year from now; one that will be influenced by new research and by the maturation of the set of phenomena we refer to when we use the term “convergence.”

I agree. This area has changed so much in the last two years in particular. It has reached a point of maturity in the sense that there is a pervasive awareness and ubiquitious practice. What people are finding though, is that it isn’t as easy and as wonderful as they thought it would be. With more and more people becoming versed in this area, I’m sure we’ll see some amazing projects emerge…mature ones. I’m very excited about the future of this area!

Check out: http://www.jour.sc.edu/news/convergence/