The E-journalism. Twittering with Howard Rheingold

I’ve the pleasure to publish another great interview made by Andrea Romeo, a really creative member of Brain 2 Brain! This time he interviewed Howard Rheingold by twitter: simply 2.0

Have a brainy time reading it.

Nowadays more and more people speak about social networks, and it seems that such instruments are becoming more and more powerful. There are lots of people that, unified under what are named smart mobs, work and fight against what they think wrong in their world. And these smart mobs are so powerful if we think that in Philippine, in 2001, they organized a rebellion against their president Estrada just using sms.

Social networks are a kind of Artu’ round table, where all the agents exchange information by a peer to peer relationship. Information can be manipulated, commented, filtered out, and put again in the stream of communication. Each agent has to have an active role in this “social game”, becoming filter of something which is bigger then him, or rather the communication itself which is a new environment, a new world. So the internet made the world of media so uncertain: the internet took off every certainty to the old power, the traditional media, the ancien regime, since what it was called mass now is the main player of this game.
And, step by step, the internet is getting its soul, is going away from the older media, becoming something new. We left the world of traditional institutions in the name of one made by entities. Those entities are people without a body, but that unify themselves in something new to find some true, to try to make a better world. And also, new powers came over there, in this digital eden, people with different aims. Some time they fight, other time they collaborate toward a common ideology and aim.
It seems that twitter is the most powerful social network ever. The communication is very fast there, as this new world imposes us. And also it is a communication very specialized, since you can follow (and be followed by) only people you are interested on, eliminating all the formal rituals the old programs imposed us (maybe because still linked to the traditional world). So, in few words, a World made by fast entities who deal with every sort of communication/information.

I wanted to know how does it change the journalism in the internet, and also how to make journalism in a program like twitter. Then I decided to interview Howard Rheingold, guru of the internet and scientist who is studying twitter as a new phenomenon. We met each other by skype about one month ago (I was in Mississippi and he was in California), but I decided to publish this interview only now because I think this is a good moment, given that in Italy, in these days, directors of some of the main italian newspapers, and politics as well, have made lots of bad critics about the internet, especially about the e-journalism. I see these polemics like the usual efforts of our
“ancien regimen” to try to keep their power.

Howard Rheingold (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Rheingold) is a well-known american writer who has been one of the firsts who wrote about the internet in the early 80’s. Among his books there are to cite Tools of Thought (1985), The Virtual Community (1985), Virtual Reality: Exploring the Brave New Technologies of Artificial Experience and Interactive Worlds from Cyberspace toTeledildonics, Smart Mobs (2003).

A.R.: This is the first question: what is the difference between classical journalism and journalism on the internet?

H.R.: For a journalist who works in the internet the problem is the same of a journalist who works in the real world: to verify the source. There is no difference between a journalist who works in the internet and a journalist who works in reality. For instance, now we are having an interview by skype, and we are seeing each other. Obviously, having a face to face meeting allows us to have more ambient stimulus, but this doesn’t mean that a journalist who decides to use the internet for his porpoises might not find a way to use it very well. The problem is not making journalism by the internet, but better how to use the internet to make journalism. If, on one hand there is the limit of the real environment stimulus, on the other hand the internet allows people to contact each other though they are many miles away, and as a consequence, if a journalist knows how to use the internet, he doesn’t need to go anywhere at such cost.
Also, there is the feedback. In the past journalists didn’t have to deal with people. They used to write an article, the newspaper published it, and that was all. With the coming of the internet citizens have been involved in the public mediate debate, debate which is interactive and connected. So a good journalist who works in the internet has to be able to select the sources, to follow the internet tendencies, to know how to contact people. In the meantime, he has to consider that every thing he writes will be read and commented on by many people in a public area. So what changes now is that the journalist can be “touched”. The feedback is a form of control for the journalist, an instrument that allows people to trust each other in the internet.

A.R.: Referring to the internet, can we say it started a global journalism?

H.R.: Well, of course. The internet is already a global environment, so of course it is possible. It always depends on the journalist’s aim: on what he is looking for, on which ambient he moves himself (global or local), on his skills, and more. In this moment you are interviewing me from another place of the world.

A.R.: So, the internet seems to be a big metropolis, a huge environment with different neighborhoods, tendencies. In this environment people tell facts both from the “real life” and from the internet, itself. What is the role of the journalist in this contest? I mean, might it be possible to have a kind of journalism which talks only about the internet?

H.R.: Yes, the internet is a huge environment. Well, even here is too hard to generalize. What I teach to my students firstly is journalism, and then I teach them how to make it in this global environment. Then each will choose how, and if, to use the internet in this global environment. Inside the internet, each chooses which topic to write about. Some will write about the web, others about the real world, others will write about both.

A.R.: You told me that you are interested in Twitter. What is Twitter in the Howard Rheingold point of view?

H.R.: As I write in my articles, Twitter is a new channel which gives new kinds of communication. In the beginning it might look a little “banal”, easy, but if you really get into Twitter, then you will find it is a very useful instrument. Its main characteristic is the speed which allows people to skip the formal rituals we usually use in e-mails. By Twitter we change lots of information, and we do it only with people we are interested on, and without formal rituals. Then, even from Twitter could come a virtual community which is characterized by its Twittering. Talking about journalism, well, even in Twitter it is possible to make that. Again, the question is not whether to make journalism in twitter, but better, how to use a program like twitter to make journalism.

A.R.: While I was reading your article about twitter, I underlined a sentence where you say:
“if it is not funny, it won’t be useful”. Given that twitter looks so easy to use as a program, as an interface, the real problem is not how to use twitter, but how to connect to people, to play “social games”. In this context, how important is, in your point of view, the ludo-logic prospective in the internet?

H.R.: Well, if the internet was only news, then I don’t think it would be so interesting to people as a medium. The communication, in general, is something very huge, and the internet is like reality. In the web people tell about different topics, each very different from the others: news, sport, fashion, politic, everything. Think about sports; in reality sports link many people. In the internet there are places which look like public areas with public topics, and places which instead are private areas where virtual communities share common interests.

A.R.: What is the future of the internet in your point of view?

H.R.: The internet is probably the most powerful instrument of communication ever. There is lots of business in the internet, especially since many industries have started investing in this medium. So, there is a very important ideological conflict between those people who want to keep the internet free, and those who instead want to have a control on it because of their interests. The problem is not free access in the internet, but better, free content of communication. It is important to remember that the internet started as a free medium, an open source philosophy and this has been the ideology of the medium for many years. The internet started as a medium for exchanging free information, where people around the world exchanged data to improve the medium itself, and to improve their knowledge as well. With the coming of more and more new economic powers, obviously there came new interests. The problem is still open, and it is very hard given that the net is split between these two very strong powers characterized by those people who want a free medium and those who want to control it.

Interviewing Prince Paskua

1. How was  born the idea of the Manifesto with Morin ?

The idea to write this manifesto was born by Gonod Pierre, Edgar Morin and me a sense of urgency to act before the fact for the world and the feeling of impending disaster (paranoia criticism or lucidity). And that the crisis was not only a systemic financial crisis,  we have also been preceded by a call by the Caribbean intellectuals during the riots in Guadeloupe. (note that these alerts do not come only from a Western capital, but odds exotic, like the insurgency coming from the suburbs marginalized …)

2. What ’s the message perceived by the world from your art?

I do not know how “the world” sees my art. I know that Edgar Morin, that is also an expert in contemporary visual arts, received in my creative process, and maybe in my personal adventure, my past history, and political commitment to practice my “art” — my artivists “- a metaphor for the principle of metamorphosis (the Greek poeïsis).

3. Your Manifesto for the Metamorphosis of the World has proposed “7 main guidelines” (political reform, politics of humanity and civilization, economic reform, social reform, reform of thought, education reform, reform of life, moral reform) to change our doldrums world. What do you answer to the most likely critic that it could result too much “utopian”?

Much of the criticism of the events on its side so-called “utopian”. I admit to myself that the happy side of a messianic “appeal” to annoy the most pessimistic readers and those who accomodate every day the humanity running towards the abyss. However, it would be utopian to believe that we could go longer on that road and that the speech “refounding” of a system in collapse is totally irresponsible. We do not rebuild the Berlin Wall or the Twin Towers in New York (otherwise known as World Trade Center, which in my opinion, was actually the target attacked by terrorists …). Furthermore, it is not proposed in this text the desire for global governance.

The manifesto is written at a time in history when humanity is at a crossroads – where the issue of its survival as humankind is raised. A dramatic conclusion is drawn because of observation errors, and proposed routes (which are not proposals for a political program) are those we think should be followed to understand the complexity of the world and humanity, even if our insight leads us to believe that the possibilities of metamorphosis, if real, are unlikely. We are in full dystopia …

For me, if we were on the road to utopia (and if this was utopia pirate), I feel in very good company with Edgar Morin and Pierre Gonod …

4. Do you think that the metamorphosis process starts first from the single deep consciousness (individual process) or is it a collective process influencing the individuals like a “meme”?

As stated in the manifesto, the process of metamorphosis can be described as the sum of actions and feedback of individual and collective initiatives. We can obviously not predict long term what emerges, but the restoration of human rights or its destruction. We know that this process exists, even in human societies the more traditional (as opposed to the modern term), and that history teaches us that “every innovation, every creation starts with an extremely small deviation, sometimes concentrated in one individual which, if it manages to protect and spread, eventually becomes a powerful historical force, “to quote Edgar Morin. The manifesto is both a prophecy of chaos and a call to engage in ways of knowledge, understanding and put into practice individual and collective to trigger a process of metamorphosis (and not to build a new system of beliefs) .

5. Has your art experienced a greater inspiration in your choice of living in Polynesia? If yes why?

I’m sensible to my environment daily and often times I had to wear my eye on the horizon.

Beyond my own psycho-geographic drift alone on a boat sailing for years since my departure from the port of Ortigia, I am also confronted with another culture, an otherness that helped me at least help me to know myself.

Furthermore, the discovery of a fundamental and characteristic element of the Polynesian culture, the “mana” that can be translated as “presence”, a research oriented towards the singular expression of this “presence” or more precisely the “presence of absence” rather than me make a “representation” more or less false, more or less clever, as in Western art. My expressionism is “shamanic” in that it attempts to survey my highlight and confront me directly to a primal (and do not see any desire for transcendence – the man will not be exceeded). My artistic practice is “imaginalis”, to borrow a word by Avicenne, because it opens gold” doors ” …

Finally, it is not surprising from a historical and political, that the overthrow of the world to be able to learn from the antipodes, and margins of our continental cities …

Copyright 2009 – BRAIN 2 BRAIN – Ivonne Citarella

Monday 29th june 2009, Conference given by Prince Paskua

B2B has the pleasure to invite to you at 1 PM SLT (10 pm in Italy) to a conference given by the artist Prince Paskua on 29th of June in the SL French Sim of Extralab about the Manifesto for Metamorphosis of the World, signed together with Edgar Morin (philosopher and sociologist) and Pierre Gonod (futurist and political scientist).

We’ll talk with Paskua about the seven main guidelines proposed by the Manifesto to change our world: political reform, politics of humanity and civilization reform, economic reform, social reform, reform of thought, education, life reform and moral reform.

Can we still believe in a global change, or is it utopian?

Let’s ask it to Paskua and think about together!

The conference will be streamed on the Web at the Pyramid Channel and in the home page of Brain 2 Brain.

You can also join this event on Facebook.

Special thanks to Arcana Jansma (digital set designer) and to Baby Pooley who has organized the event.

pg6ah4uriq

The Future of Media? The Avatar! – Interviewing Jeffrey Ventrella

This is an inteview to Jeffrey Ventrella made by B2B Creative Andret Beck aka Andrea Romeo  published on Ning on 3th of june.

Following McLuhan, each medium is an environment which is made by a ground and a figure. Well, if you see a virtual world, it seems that the figure, what stands out in front of our screen, is the avatar. The avatar is the protagonist of virtual worlds, and the strategies of communication by avatar are many. Sometimes the avatar becomes the main figure, other times it puts himself away, disappears from the set becoming part of the ground, and giving so a role to the virtual world user who communicates with the virtual set or with other avatars, avatars and set which now stand out in the screen (becoming figures).
Anyway, when we think about virtual worlds always we think about avatars, or rather that character we “wear” and becomes our guide in the exploration of the computer ambient. Like Virgilio for Dante, the avatar in fact is our guide in these places so close to us, but so far away as well, in these parallel dimensions. It is part of that world, is made by the same material, so it knows very well its dimension: the user communicates in the virtual world as well, but only the avatar can really touch it.
Of course, only we can decide where to go in virtual worlds, but without our avatar(s) we could not go anywhere. Furthermore, if our avatar cannot go to some place in the virtual world, we cannot either. And, of course, without us our avatar could not move. As a consequence, the relation between avatars and users is a kind of “collaboration”, a “pact”, and because of this “pact” the avatar is so important for those who decide to go into virtual worlds, and vice-versa.
Until now we talked about a kind of avatar- virgilio, but what it happens when we can create our own avatars using our imagination, like in Second Life, where their role is not only as our guide, but better as our own alter ego, a representation of ourselves? Well, in this case avatars, born by our own fantasy, become part of us, they represent us. Then avatars become our own creature, our digital Frankenstein. Avatar and human being become the same thing, they fuse to each other in a new way, a new medium.
Avatars started few time late the coming of computers. They are the medium which allows us to communicate in virtual worlds, which have their own aesthetic, personality, and intelligence. The diffusion of avatar philosophy creates a new kind of human being, a “homo medium”, which is made by the fusion between the user and his avatar. By medium I mean the classical meaning of the word “medium”, its etymology, or rather “a person with paranormal powers who is able to communicate with entities which live in other dimensions”: the power of this kind of man, the “homo medium”, is the technology, while the far away entities are the avatars.
To better understand the role of avatars in our society, I interviewed Jeffrey Ventrella, digital artist and co-creator of an important virtual world (There.com). Ventrella is interested in the avatar communication, and worked for Linden Lab where he developed important aspects of Second Life.

Andrea Romeo: well, the first question I want to ask you is: who is Jeffrey Ventrella? I mean, what are your interests? what is your job, your studies etc.

Jeffrey Ventrella: I am an artist who writes software – because that is the medium of the future. I currently work at the Internet Archive, and am helping to use visual language to make knowledge more accessible to people. I also lecture and write papers on the subject of artificial life. I co-founded the Virtual World company, There.com and then worked at Linden Lab (Second Life) for two years. I invented flexiprims, and avatar puppeteering. I am currently writing a book called “Virtual Body Language”.

A.R.: what is the different between an artist who writes software and a software engineer? And what do u mean by“visual language”, and what the relation between “visual language” in virtual worlds” and in traditional media like paintings, cinema, etc..?

J.V.: Well, when people say “software engineer”, they usually refer to someone who formally studied computer science, and who works on developing software, for various purposes. In my case I started life as an artist (both parents were in the art field and I was in an art program in college)…. but when I discovered programming, I immediately saw the potential for software to be a tool for me to develop my visions and animations. And so I embraced software as my new medium. An artist who writes software uses the same problem-solving methods and uses the same parts of the brain as a traditional artist. When I say “visual language” – I refer to the counterpart to text language (or verbal language) which is so important for human communication and expression. When we design a web site, we are using visual language to communicate the intent of the web site, and to indicate to the user how it functions and where to go for different purposes. Visual language is also key for developing virtual worlds. A virtual world is not merely a simulation of the appearance of reality. It is by necessity a cinematic experience. And so cinematic language – one form of visual language – is required to make the virtual world compelling and successful.

A.R.: But there is a new component in this new form of art language which is the interactivity, right? what an artist of virtual World thinks when he knows that someone else is going to interact with his master pieces, and also what is the role of the puppet in this kind of relation between the designer and the “players”?

J.V.: I think you are referring to interactivity – an important aspect of virtual world design (and web site design) that is not present in static artforms. So, yes, there is a component of this artform in which it will come to life in different ways, depending on who uses it and what is done. And you ask about puppets. This is something I have been thinking of a lot lately In a virtual world, the avatar can be seen as a puppet. But not a dumb puppet that you stick on your hand or hang from a string. It is a semi-autonomous puppet. It has some intelligence. And we can design avatars to have more autonomy at certain times. This is why I call avatars “semi-autonomous puppets”
(www.avatology.com)

A.R.: can you tell me more about the concept of “avatology”? Do you think it might be a new kind of science or what? And, what do you mean for semi-autonomous puppets?

I don’t think it’s really a science as much as it is an art. I just use the word“avatology” for fun. But there is an interesting phenomenon emerging, as you have pointed out: the avatar and its human driver form a sort of collaborative duo. By the way, I am speaking of third-person cinematic views of avatars specifically as opposed to “classic” virtual reality in which the user wears a head-mounted display, and thereby “becomes” the camera (i.e., there is no cinematic language). The avatar, as a visible entity that the user projects onto is both a separate entity as well as a manifestation of the user. And so when the avatar falls off a cliff, the user feels pain! The art (and science of avatology plays out in the space between total avatar autonomy on the one hand, and total user immersion on the other hand.

A.R.: can you tell me more about There and Second Life? Also about the communication by Avatar, and the future of this kind of communication?

J.V.: Yes, well, There.com is a virtual world that I created with Will Harvey – he was the main founder and put the money in at the start. I was the Principal Inventor. We came out before Second Life. And we had a more polished look – more expressive avatars, and more aesthetic environments. But Second Life allowed users to build their own content – and they had a better business model for success. And also (in my opinion) the public was more ready to accept this new thing called a Virtual World).
When I joined Linden Lab, my purpose was to create the same level of expressiveness in the avatars as I had done for There.com. But after I arrived, there was little interest in the company for enhancing the avatar – and so I was not able to make a very big impact. So I developed flexiprims, which turned out to be a popular thing in SL.

A.R.: what are “flexiprims”?

J.V.: Well, before flexiprims all objects in SL were rigid. They were stiff chunks of geometry. No flowing hair, no rubber hoses, no waving flags, etc. Sure – you could make an animated (kinematic) piece of geometry – but it didn’t behave realistically. Flexiprims hang with gravity, get blown with the wind, and drag behind when you run with them. So they use true physics.

A.R.: Why did u think flexprims were so important? I mean, if a Virtual World is “another world”, why the need to make it with rules which come from the real world?

J.V.: Ah – I hear the subtext of your question I think you are really asking – why should we make a virtual world that imitates the real world? Well, think of the design space and as existing on a continuum. At one end is total realism. Everything looks exactly like the real world, and behaves like the real world. At the other end is total abstraction. Complete chaos (but with infinite potential for expression). Somewhere in between is the best place for making a virtual world. Consider gravity. I heard one artist who was creating a virtual world claim that gravity is not needed. And that virtual world designers should not include that in a simulation because it constrains the participant’s experience. But it turns out that for most purposes, people want gravity, because it allows things to be stable and predictable – and they can focus their creativity on other aspects of the world (like making crazy avatars). Crazy – highly individualistic avatars that are floating in space, willy nilly, might be a bit scary
Another similar situation: When we were developing There.com, Will and I both were against the idea of teleporting. Because we wanted the sense of “place” to be very important. We believed that if people were allowed to teleport, they would ignore the beauty and integrity of the space they are in. But it turns out that people REALLY want to be able to teleport – and this doesn’t take away from the appreciation of the “placeness” of the virtual world. People naturally deconstruct the world, and are happy with a mixture of realism and magic.

A.R.: (maybe this comes form the “zapping culture” .. ) I mean, teleport is like when u use your remote in television and u change channel

J.V.: Ah! Yes. Well, the internet is a spaceless realm – no geography. There is no inherent contiguity – and so it is like the sea of radio and TV channels that people jump in and out of. So people have already been “teleporting” way before virtual worlds were made

A.R.: I want to ask you about Avatar Language. Why do u think it is so important for users to have an Avatar? How does it change the communication using an avatar? And what the future? (I mean, do u think in future, with the improving of technology, we will still have fantasy avatar or maybe we will have avatars each like our own body)?

J.V.: When the written word was invented, human expression became disembodied. This is both a minus and a plus. The minus side is that we lost a lot of our body language. The plus side was that Western civilization was born. Now we have a strange new phenomenon: the written word is being used in “conversations”. People use IM – real-time verbal (;) language. This was not the original intent of the written word. And so we have to insert our expression – as if we were talking (like smileys)
The avatar allows us to put our body back into communication. I believe that in the future, we will have several kinds of avatars for several purposes. Some avatars will be fantasy-role-playing characters. Others will be true representations of our realtime selves, which will help us have remote conversations.

A.R.: (amazing answer this) Thinking about Roland Barthes, one of the most important semiotic Theorist, he says that also our clothes are media. Well, Avatars are Clothes, or are more than Clothes? (or are both?)

J.V.: Yes – agree. To the extent that our clothes communicate, avatars are like clothes.
In that case, many things are clothes. Like my bookcase. It communicates a lot about me – by the books I read (or want to read

A.R.: Virtual Worlds seem will be the future media (as u said in the beginning). What are the strategies of developer of this medium to attract people in their worlds? Do u think there is a connection with videogames (so the ludologist aspect)? And what the future of the older media? Traditional media will disappear? Or maybe they we will be included in virtual worlds? If so, which will be the shape of this new media (the mixing between traditional and the new ones?)

J.V.: Interesting question! Well, I think “virtual world” is really a state of mind, rather than a medium. So, as the medium matures, it will naturally mix in with other traditional mediums. There will always be isolated virtual worlds – self-contained experiences that allow one to become immersed in a special experience. But I think there will also be other kinds of virtual worlds – which have no clearly-defined edges. Like intersections of Twitter, Facebook, Movies, text-messaging, and Skype. (to name a few elements). The new thing that virtual world technology brings… is simulated space and physics and embodiment. And I think this is having an impact on all traditional media – it is changing the conversation. Also, as global warming becomes more of a threat, I think we will need avatars and virtual worlds more – because we have to stop flying so much and burning off petroleum and spewing CO2 into the air. That means we have to communicate remotely. And I hate to think that we lose our bodies in order to save the earth. That’s why avatars are important for the future.

A.R.: and what about video-games … are they important in developing virtual worlds? what they role?

J.V.: Well, some people think that video games are the mother of virtual worlds. Just look at the number of computer game developers working at Linden Lab

The Virtual World Language: the communication “via-avatar” – A conference given by Jeffrey Ventrella

more about “The Virtual World Language: the commu…“, posted with vodpod

This is the conference given by Jeffrey Ventrella at Brain 2 Brain Club on Second Life the 14th of june in collaboration with Orange Island.

Special thanks to Nick Rhodes of Orange team, who hosted the conference, Arcana Jansma (B2B Creative), who is a talented Italian artist and designer who creates outstanding immersive environments for B2B’s conferences, and Andret Beck for having made this conference possible.

Last but not least, a great thanks to Jeffrey for his helpfulness

Have a brainy vision!