The answers my friends- are blowin’in the wind….

Convergence is a word that is embraced, feared, reviled and for those who try to ignore it- a warning bell that times are changing.  It is also an idea that is readily accepted by both of this week’s authors; however while both Jenkins and Felten do agree that digitization brought about convergence – their articulation of this idea is quite different.  Jenkins’ article “Worship at the Altar of Convergence” builds off of the ideas raised in Felten’s
Princeton lecture but with an important difference.  According to Jenkins “ready or not, we are already living within a convergence culture” (Jenkins 16) so in short, the earthquake that Felten had predicted is already here…

Further, Felten’s idea of the “universal machine” as a means of achieving convergence is refuted by Jenkins who says that “convergence is more than just the technological process of bringing together multiple media functions within the same devices.  Instead, convergence represents a cultural shift as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content,” (Jenkins 3).

Basically, Jenkins takes the machine out of the convergence idea and instead places the focus squarely on the consumer- an intriguing concept, but I still think the real answer lays somewhere in between.  The only way for convergence to occur as Jenkins said- that is “within the brains of individual consumers and through social interactions” is by having some type of enabling device that allows the consumer to mix the media in the first place- i.e. the universal machine…

Jenkins also talked about this idea of collective intelligence as a challenge to the traditional power of the media companies- but this power is only as strong as the computers that enable the sharing of media in the first place.  This argument seems like the chicken and the egg dilemma, yes there is a collective intelligence around new media- but it arises because of the new technologies enabling the media… And thus we go round and round.  In an age of digitization the means must be present to share the files- otherwise there is no community.  Why else would the media companies try so hard to shut down every new technology that comes along- they realize the latent power and what these new technologies can enable consumers to achieve…

The real resolution to this is that media companies should do what the stars have done and converge themselves- remember when a movie star was only in movies- or when a rapper only made rap music? Nowadays it isn’t clear which medium (if any) is their real focus – as stars simultaneously launch an album, premier a movie, design a clothing line and a new fragrance- all while also starring in their own reality show… Talk about convergence. 

Media companies should be focusing not on stopping these new technologies, but embracing them.  They should spend less time in court fighting tooth and nail and more time in brainstorming sessions trying to figure out how they can utilize these new mediums to their benefit… This is particularly poignant when one considers that “many of the measures implemented by media companies are unenforceable anyway” (Felten.) 

Jenkins describes the present state of things as “convergence culture, where old and new media collide,” (page 2).  I would say the collision is more like a tidal wave washing over the media monopolies.  Lest we add the current media moguls names’ to the growing list of history’s Cassandras (Jack Valenti and John Philip Sousa to name a few from the Felten article) there has to be a paradigm change in the way the monopolies think about and approach new technologies.  Cut the hysteria and build a business plan- the first who does just might have a shot on a hostile take over of the rest…