Friday, June 30, 2017

The Study of Immersive Journalism in a Post-Truth World #Science

Finding a scribe more bereft of science or substance than this one will be difficult or impossible.

In a recent Frontiers in Digital Humanities article, Eva Dominguez, a senior digital communication consultant and multimedia journalist, analyzes the rise of immersive journalism and its particular set of challenges.  Immersive journalism in a post-truth world

That intro sounds straight-up ... but it won't last.

In a climate of post-truth, characterized by increased individualism and decreased objectivity, immersive journalism seems to reinforce both. Immersive journalism literally puts you - the participant - center stage through aural and visual cues, allowing you to directly interact with the story. It could soon include ways of altering the narrative itself, which should presumably remain unalterably objective.

- PO

We know we're in a post-truth world ... because some immersive journalist said so.

How do we know it's bullshit?  Because some immersive journalist said so.

In plain English, it permits you to make all the news about yourself and gut it of any informational value whatsoever.

Immersive journalism doesn't keep you on the other side of events like traditional journalism does, but places you at the heart of the action through techniques like Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR). You - the outsider - get to step in and become an insider.

It is poised at the threshold of a media crisis where personal feelings fuel ratings and shape reality. Immersion threatens to be a point-of-no-return in the liberal's post-truth nightmare. Fact turned into fiction, forever.

But while the medium is the message, the message is an open question and not a verdict. Immersion is a timely, if thorny, innovation and could either go very wrong or very right.

- PO

Oh, God; how we love the smell of melodrama in the morning.  It's not just wrong, it's very wrong.

Watson:  what's the answer?

Possibly consider immersing in a thesaurus rather than bathing in self-absorption.

Yes, immersion centers on a highly personal experience, but this experience is not under your control. There is always a little distance involved. The event - factual - happens to you, without being yours to fabricate. It is shareable and belongs to everyone.

The key, then, is in the degree of immersion. Too much of it and the truth could get lost in imagination where you're happy to make your own reality because you can.

With immersion, your ego is soothed and defused in equal measure.

This only works if the technology enhances the experience of the narrative.

- PO

We didn't skip anything and that Yes answered a question no-one asked.  Unknown if that technique is derived from something in immersive journalism school although Self-Aggrandizing Rubbish 101 seems likely as part of the curriculum.

Watson:  is there any actual content or is it just more of the same?

We didn't get to the best part yet.

But there is also the possibility - gamers know it well - for viewers to interact with the virtual context.
This can affirm either critical distance or a post-truth predilection for alternative facts.

A measure of participation would counteract an overly passive, emotional experience. On the other hand, the risk of relativism is also apparent. How can we involve the uninvolved in an ethically sound way, which is to say without changing the inside facts?

- PO

How about that slice of sweet potato pie.  Immersive journalism is like gaming because ...

Hot tip on that, Eva:  immersive journalism IS gaming.

Watson:  at least she finally cracked a thesaurus.

It didn't do much good, did it.

Watson:  may I answer her last question?

Please do be my guest.

Watson:  the way to engage the uninvolved is to tell the fucking truth, lady.  It doesn't take video, a cheerful smile, or a big, honking set of boobs.  We want truth and we're not fucking getting it so stuff that into your dipsomaniacal dissertation.

Eva Dominguez:  you don't know if I drink so that was an alternative fact!

No, that was a bare-faced cheapshot.  Suck it.

No comments: