“New media”, as defined by L. Manovich, is similar to traditional media in that “it can be said to represent, as well as help construct, some outside referent: an physically existing object . . .”(Manovich 15), yet it differs mainly in that it is malleable. I would not limit the definition to this, though. “New media” is also the transition where the “translation of all existing media into numerical data accessible through computers”(Manovich 20) occurs. Manovich repeatedly claims that the dawn of “new media” followed the advent of the computer, but not the traditional media processing computer, instead the new computer, “a media synthesizer and manipulator“(Manovich 26). Another key aspect of new media is that any object in it “consists of independent parts, each of which consists of smaller independent parts, and so on”(Manovich 31); this being conducive to ease of manipulation, deletion and substitution. Manovich additionally introduces the concepts of automation and variability in new media, stating that new media tends to automate both parts of the creative process and, more recently, the access of the media itself. “New media” is variable in that the way programming is organized, the individual receives a unique, custom version of whichever media they are looking at; this also has cultural implications that reflect the time period we live in. This changes the way humans view the world because it allows us to “connect many important characteristics of new media that on first sight may appear unrelated”(Manovich 40) and also because we model the world as containing “variables rather than constants”(Manovich 43). In conclusion, while Manovich does admit that classical art and sculpture also were interactive in their own ways, he insists that “the most fundamental quality of new media that has no historical precedent” is “programmability”(Manovich 47). USC Communications professor, Henry Jenkins, echoes this by stating that “the new media operate with different principles than the broadcast media that dominated American politics for so long: access, participation, reciprocity and peer-to-peer rather than one-to-many communication.” (Jenkins 208)
For all its benefits, however, new media does not come without repercussions. J. Parikka reminds us that “digital culture is completely dependent on Earth’s long duration” and that the “legacy of Silicon Valley will not amount to corporations or branding or creativity or individualism, but its soil: the heavy concentration of toxins that will last much longer than the businesses . . .” For as many climate awareness activist groups there are, many, many more of us forget on a daily basis the quantity of damage we are doing to the Earth to ensure we mine the materials needed for our new iPhones or the underground cables that connect us through the Internet. J. Parikka also jabs at us with the notion that our “new media” will soon be “growing waste piles that are the true leftovers of “dead media””.
Bibliography:
Jenkins, Henry. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. NYU Press 2006. Print.
Manovich, Lev. The Language of New Media. London: The MIT Press, 2007. 10-61. Print.
