Presentation made at National Association of Media Educators' conference, Christchurch, New Zealand, 28 September 2009

1. Media Studies 1, 2, 3Thinking about the future of media studies Ben Goldsmith University of Queensland and Australian Film, Television and Radio School B.goldsmith@uq.edu.au Ben.Goldsmith@aftrs.edu.au

2. Media Studies 1, 2, 3 David Gauntlett – Media Studies 1.0 and 2.0 Filmmaking and Participatory Culture Responses to Media Studies 2.0 New Zealand’s Opportunity?

4. Gauntlett’s Media Studies 1.0 Expert fetish Classics and canons Traditional media focus Critical resistance to big media Teaching students to ‘read critically’ ‘Conventional’ research methods Division between audience receivers and expert producers ‘Sit back and be told’

5. Gauntlett’s Media Studies 2.0 Everyday meaning, diverse, ordinary participants Long tail, user generated content, DIY media Global media focus, internet and digital media People are already critical, recognise existing knowledge and understanding ‘Creative’ research methods Produsage, everybody is creative ‘Making-and-doing culture’

6. ‘Making is Connecting’ Passive audiences, passive learners Guy Claxton What is the Point of School? ‘learning muscles’: curiosity, courage, investigation, experimentation, imagination, reasoning, sociability, reflection Creative thinking, creative solutions Making things=making the world your own=engagement=investing the world with meaning=connecting

7. Lego – Serious Play

13. BazLuhrmann – Set to Screen

19. Internet TV aggregators

20. Sweding

23. Scorched

24. Dark Knight ARG

25. Transmedia Storytelling Proselytisers: Henry Jenkins/Lance Weiler Digital technologies transform narrative, filmmakers must keep up New relations with ‘audience’, ‘hypersocial logic’ vs. individual viewing Creating ‘layered experience’, adding ‘texture’ Work that“pushes beyond its frame” World building and seriality Sceptic: David Bordwell “Most Hollywood and indie films aren’t any good” Need large, motivated fan base “Many films thrive by virtue of their gaps … films risk giving up mystery” Art works gain strength by having firm boundaries Difficulty of critical analysis and evaluation

28. Responses to Media Studies 2.0 David Buckingham What’s new? Who’s participating? What are they doing? Who’s making money? Who’s doing the work? And is any of it any good?

29. David Buckingham What are the educational implications? In defence of media studies

30. Sonia Livingstone and Ranjana Das: The End of Audiences?

31. Toby Miller: Media Studies 3.0 Holistic, less audience-centric Internationalism Labour Hybrid approaches – ethnography, political economy, aesthetics Diasporas Collective identity and power Gender, race, class, sexuality in everyday life across national lines

32. Special issue of Television and New Media 10.1 (2009) – ‘My Media Studies’ Themes: Acknowledgement of transformation – not return to Media Studies 1.0 Argument for greater ‘frottage’ between 1.0 and 2.0 Media Studies 2.0 privileges technological access, not true for all, Media Studies 2.0 collapses distinction between form and study of form

33. Special issue of Television and New Media 10.1 (2009) – ‘My Media Studies’ Media Studies 3.0 themes Interdisciplinarity – multidirectional and relational Importance of critique Internationalism – global media studies How to structure and negotiate the overwhelming information environment Materiality of media Environmental impact of media technologies Questions of ownership, media power “Let’s think and do”

34. Film – NZ’s opportunity My work as ‘production studies’ – desire to embed this, opportunity for NZ to embed this International Relational – from topography to topology Labour Participatory culture – engagement

35. New Zealand Films? Bungee Jumping of their Own Antarctic Journal

36. Korean films? A Korean Film