In late March 2015, Twitter launched a live-streaming
app called Periscope.
Though Periscope is only about a week old, there is already conversation about how giving social media-based live-streaming capabilities to your average, smart phone-wielding citizen is posed to change the way the digital world functions, from news media to politics to advocacy and beyond.
Though Periscope is only about a week old, there is already conversation about how giving social media-based live-streaming capabilities to your average, smart phone-wielding citizen is posed to change the way the digital world functions, from news media to politics to advocacy and beyond.
Periscope is an application that links with Twitter and
allows users to watch and broadcast live video quickly and easily. Viewers can
interact with the live-stream they’re viewing by leaving
The ease and availability of live-streaming technology
could have a significant impact on the way news media works. News stories
happen after the fact. Using live-stream, however, news would no longer be solely
reported on, but could be shown to an audience as it happens on social media.
Further more, a live-streaming app adds a new dimension to the concept of
citizen journalism. Such wide spread access to live streaming creates a network
of potential live-broadcasters posed to capture important events and share it
with people to witness first hand. (Howley, 2015)
Similarly, this sort of digital technology could be a
useful tool in politics. Accessible live-stream creates a new venue for
direct-political messaging. Congressional committees and legislatures could
live-stream their meetings and votes, creating a sort of social-media based
C-SPAN, to engage citizens in the discussion in a way that has not quite
existed previously. Apps like Periscope could also be used for campaigning
purposes, equipping candidates with the ability to live-stream their speeches and
campaign stops to any of their supporters who have a Twitter account.
Live-stream has the potential to engage citizens in their democracy in a new
way by allowing them to witness previously inaccessible component of it first
hand (Fung, 2015) .
Live-stream has already been a pivotal tool in advocacy
work. The Occupy movement live-streamed from their camps across the nation as a
means of not only keeping in contact with the movement, but also to show things
like police raids and marches as they took place. Live streaming was also used
for similar purposes in Tahrir Square during the Arab Spring protests.
Accessible and easy to use live streaming technology has the potential to other
create opportunities for organizations and advocacy movements to engage with
their supporters and their networks by live-streaming meetings, demonstrations
and other events deemed crucial to their cause. Live-streaming would also allow
supporters of a cause to stay involved, active and supportive without necessarily
being present for events they may otherwise be unable to attend.
Despite the glossy prospects of social-media based
live-streaming, however, there are some down sides that have already begun to
manifest. With an app like Periscope, footage of news events and political
engagements share the same space and platform with streams of things
considerably less important, like streams of people eating food or talking to
friends. As David Karpf pointed out in his article, “The Internet and American
Political Campaigns,” having access to political content on the Web does not necessarily
mean there will be an increase in participation. Rather, internet users will
seek out what interests them, meaning those already interested in politics will
be the participations, while those who are less interested will go else where.
The same principle can be applied to social-media based live streaming, as
those who do not want to view news or politically motivated streams can easily
avoid them in favor of a stream of someone drinking a smoothie. The
availability of live streaming also has to potential to contribute to the
phenomenon of “slacktivism” by allowing would be activists to maintain their
supporter status simply by tuning into a feed without taking further action.
The accessibility of live-stream also raises some
privacy concerns, much in the way standard smart-phone video recording does:
anyone could live stream anything without those around them knowing. The
difference, however, is that the video is being shot in real time, meaning all
mistakes and missteps will be captured and broadcast indiscriminately. These
cannot be edited out like with second-hand video, nor can a live-stream be
taken down or selectively censored, as these actions occur after the fact,
whereas live streaming happens as the fact is happening.
Social media based live streaming is still a new
technology, and it remains to be seen how it will come to be used. The
technology has a lot of potential for areas of news, politics and advocacy
work, however, and could redefine the way people not only interact with these
areas, but also on social media as a whole.
Fung, B. (2015, March 26). How Periscope is already helping politicians kill the press conference
Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on LinkedIn Share via Email More
Options Resize Text Print Article Comments 8 . Retrieved March 29, 2015,
from Washington Post-Tech:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2015/03/26/how-periscope-is-already-helping-politicians-kill-the-press-conference/
Howley, D. (2015, March 27). What is Periscope, and why am I Watching Someone Eat Lunch?
Retrieved March 29, 2015, from Yahoo! Tech :
https://www.yahoo.com/tech/what-is-periscope-and-why-am-i-watching-someone-114703044374.html
Karpf, D. (2013). The Internet and American Political
Campaigns. The Forum .
WIlliams, R. (2015, March 28). What is Twitter's new Periscope app? . Retrieved March 29, 2015,
from The Telegraph : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/twitter/11499794/What-is-Twitters-new-Periscope-app.html
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.