| nettime's post-collective theorist on Sat, 12 Nov 2005 21:44:45 +0100 (CET) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
| Re: <nettime> a new definition [4x] |
Table of Contents:
Re: <nettime> a new definition
Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
Re: <nettime> a new definition
august <[email protected]>
Re: <nettime> a new definition
gl03 <[email protected]>
[Fwd: Re: <nettime> a new definition]
Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 12:59:42 +0100
From: Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> a new definition
Mark, are you shure you "coined" it?
"Whatever replaces television" seems to be to narrow, new view on the
media and new use seems to be more significant.
We can include TV and say it is about society and how it sees itself,
global masses and local experiments.
H.
[email protected] wrote:
>Folks:
>
>Since I first "coined" the term circa 1989 in various reports I wrote
>for Wall Street and business audiences and obtained this email address
>in 1992 while on the AOL roadshow from Steve Case, perhaps my original
>definition would be a curiousity.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 16:58:11 +0100 (CET)
From: august <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> a new definition
On Fri, 11 Nov 2005 [email protected] wrote:
> New media is whatever replaces television.
That's funny and kinda makes a nice guestimate of how to define "new
media".
But ...... as far as I can tell, NOTHING has replaced television.
And ...... as far as I know, television is another slippery term meaning
much more than either the piece of furniture itself or the one sided
programming that is displayed on it.
My feeling is that "new media" is a term that will stick around for a
while and then eventually die of natural causes and become no more than a
genre to describe the hype and hysteria surrounding the excitment and
disappointment of all the electronic and computational gadgetry and
systems of the mid to late 20th century. I see it more in the light of a
term like "modern art", which no longer means anything contemporary, but
is simply a genre that includes works by Judd, Modrian, Lewitt, etc. with
propaganda by Greenberg.
- -august.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 18:59:04 +0100
From: gl03 <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: <nettime> a new definition
then we might be in for quite a wait:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riepl%27s_law
gl03./
- ---
>< D \/ . ( ) R ( ;
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:59:55 +0100
From: Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
Subject: [Fwd: Re: <nettime> a new definition]
Thunderbird sux,
H.
- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: a new definition
Date: Sat, 12 Nov 2005 19:56:04 +0100
From: Heiko Recktenwald <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
References: <[email protected]>
Thanks!
[email protected] wrote:
> H:
>
> > Mark, are you sure you "coined" it?
>
> Yes, I am sure. By "coined" I mean that I introduced the term into
> business discussion -- leading to the widespread use on business cards
> and in business publications. To accomplish this you needed to be in
> the flow of business analysis, which I was.
>
> I also started an organization called the New York New Media
> Association in 1994. At its peak this group had over 15,000
> dues-paying members and could throw a party that 5,000+ would attend.
> NYNMA also had a great deal to do with popularizing the use of "New
> Media."
>
But this sounds like taking cosmetics for a face.
What seems to be shure is that AOL etc were not "new", you can laugh
about it, there was no spam etc, but there was allready internet before.
I would think more of 1959, when Cage did his things with the people
that later formed "Fluxus", most important IMHO Al Hanson, who droped
out of his Madison Avenue job, so people say, and later lived very poor
in Cologne, see his posters.
Best, H.
> Since "television" is the name of the global media environment post-WW
> II, replacing this environment with a new one is a fairly expansive
> undertaking involving hundreds of millions of people. The shift from
> mass-media to personal-media isn't narrow at all, it would seem to me.
>
> Best,
>
> Mark Stahlman
> New Media Laboratory
> New York City
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: [email protected] and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]