Orchestrated Uncertainty

A look into the troublesome issue of match and spot-fixing in cricket

Cricket is small-scale war. Two teams sent to battle on a 22-yard strip of turf. One destined to be drenched by success, the other struck by despair. They are battles filled with unscripted acts of brilliance, bravery and comradery that can create national heroes and villains, and transform average Australians into fingernail-eating, flag-bearing, umpire-berating fanatics. However, after a recent string of betting scandals surrounding Pakistan, fanatics have to ask: “Is this real or scripted drama?”.

Match and spot-fixing – The Issue

Match or spot-fixing, known as the process of eliminating the uncertainty of an event or result – such as an Australian victory or a batsman scoring less than 20 – first cast a shadow over cricket in 1981. There, on the morning of the fifth day of the third Ashes test at Headingly, Australian paceman Denis Lilley placed 20 pounds on England to beat Australia at 500-1 odds. Australia, who were leading by 250 runs with seven wickets in hand, went on to lose the test. Denis Lilley admitted his bet was placed ‘as a bit of a joke’ and received no fine or sanction.

The drama did little to change the public’s perception of match-fixing, failing to edge it from its place alongside the Loch Ness monster and Unicorn – a myth. Thus, the issue lay dormant for 25 years, surviving in the minds of the greedy; living behind hotel doors; and hidden in the file cabinets of illegal bookmakers until 2000, when South African captain Hansie Cronje was accused of fixing the result of several matches in return for sums of money in excess of $250,000US.

Revelations of Cronje‘s transgressions gripped the sporting world. South African coach, Bob Woolmer came to his captain’s defence, rubbishing the claims while labelling Cronje as “a man of integrity”. Cricketing purists followed suit, not wanting to believe that the gentleman’s game could be treated in such a way. However, months of investigation eventually lured a tearful confession from Cronje who admitted his ‘love and admiration for his sport and country was matched and overpowered by his love of money’.

They were words that changed the public’s perception of cricket forever. No longer could audiences simply check their scepticism at the turnstiles and take on trust that a victory for David over Goliath was not simply a pre-determined result. There were now other possibilities. A sporting contest’s ability to excite with uncertainty had been tainted and distorted.

As prominent South African freelance journalistic, Telford Vice put it: “We started asking ourselves why a particularly unsuccessful bowling change happened when it did. Was that batsman really guilty of nothing more than poor judgement when he drove tamely to short cover and set off on a disastrous single? That catch was easier to hold than to drop, so how come it went down?”

The impact on South Africa as a nation was even more detrimental, as the captain of their national side – a symbol of all that was good within their reformed, non-apartheid nation – was shown to be nothing more than a petty crook. In a King Commission he admitted to calling team meetings to share opportunities accorded by bookmakers; sharing pitch, weather and team information to bookmakers; and approaching coloured players with the purpose of getting them to under perform. Like the shooting of John Kennedy, it was utter theatre. A nation striving for perfection had been deceived by a man held in the same esteem as Australia’s Donald Bradman.

Ex-Australian captain and respected channel nine commentator, Richie Benaud said that if there was to be one positive to come out of such a tumultuous event for cricket, it would be that “it acts as a deterrent for anyone who considered doing the same”.

However, while reports dwindled, whispers of illegitimacy continued to haunt the game. In 2001, England wicketkeeper Alec Stewart was investigated and cleared of allegations he took money from a bookmaker in return for pitch information. Then in 2004 Sri Lankan batsman Marvin Attapatu was investigated during England’s tour of Sri Lanka for having $11,500US in his hotel room. Again no charges were laid.

It was not until 2008, when West Indian all-rounder Marlon Samuels was banned for two years for passing on pitch information to an Indian bookie during his sides tour of India in 2007, that a second instance of illegitimacy was proven. The International Cricket Council downplayed the incident, labelling it a one-off and not a clear reflection of the prominence of match-fixing within the game.

Like George Foreman swinging aimlessly at a rope-hugging Muhammad Ali, the ICC’s naivety was punished when, during Pakistan’s tour of England in August this year, a sting operation by News Of The World uncovered a spot-fixing scandal between a bookmaker and Pakistan opening bowlers.

The bookmaker, who was filmed discussing terms with News Of The World investigators, claimed he had bribed Pakistan opening bowlers Muhammad Asif and Muhammad Amir to bowl deliberate no-balls throughout the following day’s test match. Hours later his claims were substantiated, as the discussed no-balls were delivered at agreed points – including one from Amir that brought special mention from the commentary box.

Both Pakistan bowlers and their captain Salman Butt – accused of being the orchestrated of the event – are yet to be charged, but ex-Australian opening batsman Matthew Hayden believes their actions have effectively “shattered” a wall of sincerity he and his team-mates tried to rebuild.

“We were doing everything we could as cricketers to uphold the value and integrity of the content that gets played out there. But it only takes one…” he told The Sydney Morning Herald.

In the time it took to re-bowl the illegal deliveries, cricket’s underworld had been exposed, casting shudders down the spine of cricket purists worldwide. Purists now forced to accept bleakly that cricket may not only be a game of talent, skill and honest chance, but a series of suspicious events which are not as haphazard as we are led to believe.

As former Australian wicketkeeper Ian Healy put it: “We’d be stupid to think this is new,” he said. “How long has this lurk been going on? It’s a long time I’m sure.”

Match and spot-fixing – The Cause

The introduction and rapid growth of Twenty/20 cricket has provided players the opportunity to make previously un-thought of sums of money in less than half the time of a traditional 50-over fixture and 1/20 of the time of a test match. Logic suggests this would sour the lure of pocket-full, illegal bookmakers, but the Pakistan incident proves this isn’t the case.

Before Twenty/20 was introduced, cricketer’s such as ex-Australian batsman Damien Martyn, were complaining of burn-out and an over-crowded international schedule. Add Twenty/20 and lucrative franchise the Indian Premier League to the mix and you are presented with cricket overload. It seems that no matter what time of the year, an international team is heading to another one-day or test-match series to play for another meaningless trophy. This has mainly been due to lucrative television contracts, and India’s infatuation with Twenty/20.

Dwindling crowd numbers to the traditional one-day and test-match formats have resulted, adding an air of mediocrity to fixtures and lessening the perceived importance results. And, as Ian Healy told Sydney Morning Herald, “if the public don’t care, why will the players?”. An attitude that he believes epitomises the Pakistan team.

“If you’re into this, you haven’t got a feeling or a desire for your country, it’s simple as that,”

“It can come about for many reasons, but if a game bears no importance, then spot-fixing becomes more likely because there doesn’t appear to be any victims” Healy believes.

Matthew Hayden takes a different view, believing Pakistan’s actions reflect a difference in culture. “It’s just so disappointing and devastating for us as players to understand that even potentially can happen. But you have to have an understanding of the cultures that exist,” he told Sydney Morning Herald.

“You have a look at Pakistan which has been wiped out by the recent floods and you put yourself in the position that maybe you can try and get what’s left of your family and salvage the situation,” he said. “It puts cricket into perspective.”

Investigator and reporter Declan Hill differs again, saying that low wages are the key behind match-fixing. He says that Pakistan cricketers are involved in match-fixing because they feel like they are being exploited by the country’s highly paid cricket administrators.

”There may be an argument that the Pakistan players are paid well [relative to the general population], but some of the officials are paid as much or considerably more,” says Hill.

”The New Zealand players [for example] might not be paid well, but neither are their officials. So they don’t feel like they’re being exploited like the Pakistanis.”

PCB director-general Javed Miandad’s wage reportedly ranges between about $9000 and $12,800 a month, while Pakistan’s elite players on central contracts earn about $45,000 a year, with lower-ranked players earning $20,000 a year. Add that they have also been banned from the lucrative Indian Premier League, and they appear prime targets for criminal betting syndicates.

Throw-in a persuasive bookmaker who paints spot-fixing as a victimless crime – forgetting about the illegal gamblers – while promising instant wealth, and you uncover the cause of a problem responsible for causing cricket lovers in the eastern city of Lahore to pelt tomatoes at donkeys labelled with the names of top national players embroiled in the allegations.

Match and spot-fixing – The Solution.

Like with prominent issues such as terrorism, fuel prices climate change, intense media coverage of the Pakistan scandal has uncovered many suggestions of what needs to be done to address and eliminate the problem – some logical, others outrageous.

The International Cricket Council (ICC) has proposed the implementation of the use of undercover agents posing as illegal bookmakers to “entrap” players and weed out illegal syndicates.

ICC chief executive Haroon Lorgat is the man in charge of making it happen.

”We are thinking of setting up our own approaches to players, to see if they report it, we will think out of the box,” Lorgat told The Age.

“It is only a tentative plan at this stage, we are working on a number of measures to combat corruption”

”We are not sitting on our hands on this issue, we are being as proactive as we can in ensuring the integrity of the game is maintained.”

However, the idea has received mixed responses from the cricket world, with Australian Cricketer’s Association’s chief executive, Paul Marsh, claiming the idea of entrapping players is neither “reasonable” or “lawful”, and that it is “unclear whether the proposal is designed to focus on catching and punishing players for not reporting approaches by illegal bookmakers or catching those directly involved in match-fixing.”

Current England captain Andrew Strauss says he mirrors the beliefs of most international cricketers when he states that the ICC must ‘leave no stone unturned’ in their probe into betting corruption.

“This summer (where Pakistan toured England) has clearly demonstrated when there is a sniff of something in the air it devalues the whole game and nobody wants to play cricket in those circumstances,” Strauss told an English news conference.

Cricket Australia’s chief executive James Sutherland does not support the view of Strauss, demanding the ICC stay out of an independent commissions review of corruption and accept and implement recommendations unconditionally.

I don’t think it’s appropriate for them (the betting scandals) to be assessed by some internal person, I think a highly-credentialed expert to do a full-blown review around the world, the time is right for that,” he told the Sydney Morning Herald.

“We can’t deny it, we have to face the facts, and with that on the table, cricket administrators around the world and the ICC can take a serious look at the controls and processes and education which we have put in place over the last few years, and where we can improve.”

Independent investigator Declan Hill remains adamant that increasing player’s base wages, in Pakistan and around the world, is the only sure way to eliminate the lure of the dirty dollar.

”The only way to stop corruption is to guarantee players are getting paid properly … They shouldn’t be open to exploitation by their bosses or organised crime [which] has been around professional sport for at least the last 20 years,” Hill admits.

“Until then, you’ll never eliminate it.”

Conclusion

The cricket world, despite recent recommendations by the ICC, remains gripped by scandal. The gentleman’s game once built on integrity and competitiveness has become tainted by greed, deceit and deliberate failure.

While there are still many who contest the true impact of a deliberate no-ball if the next delivers an unplanned wicket, Declan Hill‘s question remains:

What happens if both teams are paid to lose? Will a batsman’s willingness to get out be matched by a bowlers willingness to keep him there?” And, if so, how long will it take for the cricket purist to put down his can of Carlton Draught, reach for the television remote and switch the cricket off…forever?

The increased consumption of digital network media has completely transformed and improved the relationship between publishing industries and society. In previous generations, timely news was considered that which was printed a day after occurrence, and an eager sporting fan – who had missed the opportunity to watch or listen to a match involving his favourite football team – was forced to wait for the delivery of his morning newspaper to learn of his side’s fate. Now, thanks to the internet and online newspapers, timely news is that which happened minutes before it was reported, and that sporting fan requires only an iphone and two minutes of free time to access his desired football result.

Similarly, publishing industries have changed the way they deliver information to, and interact with consumers. Online articles are supported by video, and consumers are able to comment or blog on important issues – interacting with news.

This work looks to delve deeper into these amendments, critically analysing societies new relationship with publishing industries via the following categories: timeliness; interactivity; flexibility; quality; and access.

Timeliness

As aforementioned, digital media has reshaped the definition of timeliness. It has ensured that society is no longer required to wait for the nightly television bulletin or morning newspaper, and allowed news reports to be almost instantaneous with events. An example of this is Foxsports.com.au. This website – focusing on Australian sport – reports sporting events as they happen. Delivering their users live scores and match reports, while also opening live match blogs that describe all the key plays as they happen. This ensures that users are informed at the highest level and fills the void for those who may not be able to view the match but who feel they need to know the final result as it happens.

Access

Closely related to timeliness is access. In this context, access can refer to the ability of media consumers to obtain information, or publishers ability to reach media consumers.

Digital media has changed the way society accesses information, forever. While, and before the creation of digital media, topical information was solely confined to the local 432 by 279 mm tabloid, 749 by 597mm broadsheet, or 6pm news bulletin, and received within the home, it is now available everywhere, any time, any place. You could be using your laptop computer to connect to your university’s wireless internet to view the Daily Telegraph’s latest story instead of paying attention to your lecturer; or checking the latest score update from the Ashes via your iPhone. Digital media has given you that ability.

Another issue is price. While you must purchase the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) in order to read it, you do not have to forego any hard-earned money to read the information on the SMH’s online page – a small, yet important change to the relationship between society and publishers.

Interactivity

The level of interactivity between media institutions and society has also undergone significant change. Where print media only allowed for readers to respond via letters to the editor – which could take days to reach the pages – digital media and, specifically, the creation of comment boxes below major stories has allowed readers to instantly respond to issues being discussed. This has created a forum effect, where people can actively debate with other members of society – not always in the most mature matter – in attempts to have their view known, understood and accepted.

Another example of reader interactivity can be found at Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) online via the Cars Guide section. At this location readers are able to vote on which motor vehicle they believe deserves to be named car of the year. They are able to do this in two ways: via poll voting, or allotting a certain number of stars – with five being highest – to each vehicle. This example is one of excellent marketing by SMH for, once they know which vehicles their readers enjoy, they know what to advertise.

But, mostly, interactivity has allowed a passive society – who has spent eternity with little opportunity to be heard – become more active and express their views more regularly. At the same time, it has allowed publishing institutions to learn more about their readers. Their wants. Their needs. And that is any marketers dream.

Flexibility

Flexibility is a vague term and, in this context, could refer to the readers new ability to access information whenever they want to, or publishers ability to publish information at precisely the right time – of the hour, day, or month. While both are apt, it is the new-formed powers of the media institution that is most interesting.

Digital media has transformed news reporting and publishing into a twenty-four hour a day phenomena, allowing them to publish articles at any point of the day. Ideally, this means that articles reporting on important issues, such as governmental policy, would be best received during online-news’ peak-hour – where the website is most likely to receive most hits. However, this choice is left solely to the publishers, allowing them to choose what they think is most important and leaving other issues to be published at less frequented hours of the day – such as 9pm. Similarly, they are able to post the issues they view as less important further down the webpage.

Now, while this may appear a weak argument, with many pointing out that print media institutions hold the same power – printing what they view as frivolous on the back pages of the paper – it must be remembered that while many newspaper readers will read their paper from back to front, very few online readers will read every article on a website, preferring to read the headline articles; those labelled as most viewed; before moving onto their favourite area (cars, sport, etc). Thus illustrating the increased power publishers have in their relationship with society

Quality – Hard-news articles and In-depth Reporting

The quality of publishing – focusing mainly on the writing – has declined. The requirements of online publishing and journalism has meant that quality has taken a backseat to quantity. It is no longer about the quality of the writing, but the timely nature of news. For instance, writers working for foxsports.com.au produce hard-news articles about thirty-minutes after the event they are reporting on has finished – a football match, for example. These articles are supported by a two minute video wrap of the game which is also collated by the working journalist. Thus, in thirty minutes, a journalist must play the role of writer, voice over analyst, and editor. It is this move away from specialisation – where the journalist writes, the editor edits and the video analyst dissects and analyses – that has decreased the quality of information on offer.

Another impact this need for speed has had on the fourth estate is a journalists ability to fulfil his or her most important function – substantiation. It appears, and this is purely subjective, that a focus on speed rather than quality will teach journalists that it is not the truth which is most important but, rather, the ability to produce a groundbreaking story before a ridiculously short deadline. This could impact upon the relationship between publishing institution and society because it could lead society to question if what they are reading has been properly checked. If not, then how is anyone meant to trust the publishing institution?

Furthermore, speed reporting removes the incentive to become an in-depth reporter and compose something on an issue that is perhaps more meaningful than a hard-news story on the latest interest-rate rise. Human-interest features on issues such as the pending extinction of the African Lion, or the injustice that occurs in Sudan, take time. To properly tell a story of heartache, suffering, injustice, sorrow, a journalist requires an in-depth understanding of what he, she is reporting on. However, if the trend towards express reporting continues, are publishing institutions going to give journalists that opportunity? And, if so, is society slowly being stripped of information on the issues that really matter?

Entertainment

There is no doubt about the final issue analysed in this work. Publishing institutions have used digital media to entertain society. Hard-news articles are supported by video feeds. Readers are encouraged to vote on topical issues via polls, as well as post comments and blog. And sport coverers – again, I’m referring to fox sports.com – ask users to create sporting ‘dream teams’ and participate in tipping competitions.

While the quality of writing may have declined, there is no doubt that the quality of overall coverage has increased, with video feeds in particularly providing a nice edge to reports. However, it does raise the question: if users have a video to tell them a story, why would they bother reading?

Conclusion

Digital media has changed the way society interacts with publishing institutions and the way publishing institutions provide for society. And at the rate digital media is progressing, it appears that print media is about to die, leaving society reliant on digital media. With that in mind, you’d hope that quantity won’t always be more important than quality.

Now, go on, get out there, be the worst player you can possibly be!

During makes several mentions of how the three concepts, culture, location and belief,  are interrelated in defining one’s identity, stating that “societies, identities and individuals do not exist independently of one another, and at a theoretical level, it is meaningless to criticise identities in general for depriving individuals of individuality. During also defines the two key concepts of identity; referring to an identity that is uncontrollably forced upon us, because of who we are (e.g. black, white, pakistani, aussie), as our “imposed identity”; as well as illustrating ones “self selected identity”, one that is, whether through the clothes we wear or the locations we reside, chosen by us.

During also relates much of identity to the notion of politics, consistently relating identity back to the concept. In this he claims that “politics are engaged on behalf of those with particular identities (usually historically disempowered ones) rather than organized on the basis of particular social policies or philosophies.”

An example of this would be the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City, during which Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fists, simultaneously, an action many interpreted as their way of opposing the inequality African Americans are faced with, in homeland America.  The two also forewent  shoes, paroding around in only socks, an action interpreted as symbolising many African Americans who could not afford such luxuries, as they were constantly overlooked for jobs due to race. As such, the olypians, who were acting due to the inequitable treatment they faced each day, were unknowingly fighting for the rights of entire race,  due to the social identities they had both created and had imposed on them.

“Hybridity” is another important concept that emerges throughout the article, where an individual has more than simply one identity. An example of this would be a dark-skinned feminist who is not only fighting for equality in a gender sense, but also in a racial one. The idea surrounding identity is one that is etched into societies everyday existence. People ably make assumptions about those who they do not know, viewing people in terms of what they may be, rather then what they are. You may come to see a student on campus who is always sitting in the corner of the library, witnessing such a habit each and everyday, until you finally know him not by name, but rather as “guy who sits in corner” whilst also considering him “the nerd”. Identity is everywhere, as are peoples assumptions

P.s. Do you remember that guy from that movie with big ship? You know, the one who had blonde hair and tried to save the hot girl?

Ahh.

The age of the ‘terminator’ has arrived, with the Australian and United States government recently increasing investment expenditure on ‘self-manned’ military robotics.

The increasing popularity of such technology has sparked belief that wars of the future are no longer to be “fought by humans, but rather for humans,” as stated by former consultant to Barrack Obama and leading defence expert, Peter Singer.

In a recent interview with ABC radio, Singer outlined the US government’s exponential increase in the use of unmanned robotics, whilst also establishing it’s power in allowing governments to identify and spy on suspected threats to national security.

“We went into Iraq just a few years ago with a handful of these unmanned planes. We now have over 7,000 in the US military inventory alone and the growth curve is only continuing.”

Singer also stressed the impact such “ably intrusive” technology may have on an individual’s privacy rights, one of the key ethical issues of concern behind it’s implementation. “We may be entering into an era where as opposed to 15 minutes of fame; 15 minutes of privacy is all (that) we get.”

In spite of such obvious concerns, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has confirmed Australia’s devotion in ‘robitizing’ the military, recently releasing a multimillion dollar investment plan that includes the purchase of 100 ‘remote controlled’ fighter jets.

The first of the mechanisms Horarik analyses is “whether or not people are depicted specifically or generically.” Thus whether I, in relation to my opening line, am identified on a first name basis and thus brought closer to the audience, or merely left generic, unknown, and am therefore alienated (or seperated) from the audience of the text. Horarik furthers the dimension through the analysis of a key photograph used in the “asylum seekers over board” affair. Establishing that the asylum seekers are left ”unknown, identities hidden”, through the blurring of their faces. The audience must then rely solely on the caption to gain any information of identity, and then alienated through generic, or generalised naming “the asylum seekers”.

Horarik’s second dimension of analysis, refers to how individuals are categorised within texts, either through functionalism or identification. The media text can look to refer people ‘functionally’, through naming by what one does, e.g. the opening line of my post generalising me as a “University student”; or by ‘identification, where individuals are named by what they are, regarding race, gender, or religious background, e.g. “Black gangster, Arab extremist”. Both techniques certain representations, immediately touching upon an audiences system of beliefs to create certain “stereotypical images” surronding the group, e.g. Muslim= bomb (as racist as it may sound/as sad as it may be.)

The third an final dimension Horarik refers to is the allocation of roles, revolving around the “visual and verbal transitivity (relation between terms) of representation.” She identifies how individual images create general divisions between those depicted, representing them as either ”actors” or “goals”. Horarik refers to the asylum seeker image, once more, establishing the passive representations of the “bobbing asylum seekers” whilst exemplifying the active nature of the naval women rescuing them. Through this identification, Horarik claims that such role allocation works to position the asylum seekers as desperate and weak, whilst acclaiming the naval women as powerful and compassionate.

Horarik argues that when these three dimensions overlap or conflate in a media story, clear yet very different representations, surrounding minorities such as the “asylum seekers”, and prominant government officials or “actors” can be, and are, ably established.

And, as Horarik and myself would agree, it’s by no mistake.

Kate Clarke’s text, “The Linguistics of Blame”, outlines and analyses the ways in which women are portrayed throughout the reporting “sexually violent crimes”. Referring to how blame is shifted away from the “sexually predatorory” men, and towards the female victims. Clarke argues that media outlets, drawing from recent studies focusing on UK newspaper “The Sun”, achieve such representations through different processes surrounding the naming of certain parties.

Firstly, Clarke demonstrates how media outlets identify the attacker as either sub human, e.g. ‘beast’, or human, e.g. named by marital stature, e.g. “hubby attacks wife”, to either draw an audience towards, or away, from the attacker. Victims, too, go under a similar naming process, with some techniques seemingly “partially blaming” them for the attacks they were subject to. Such labels include “divorced blonde” or “single divorcee”, seemingly given reason to the attack- “she’s blonde (good looking) and divorced (flawed), thus she must have brought it on herself”. Such labels are usually reserved for reports on attacks where the attacker was known to the victim, and thus given a “humanised” label, E.g. a husband, or boyfriend. Whereas, conversely, if the attacker involved is a stranger, Clarke suggests that more sympathetic labels will surround the victim, such as “pregnant wife”, or use of full name (if not a rape crime).

Clarke also refers to the use of “transitivity” within a text, a concept consisting how issues are reported in terms of; the process of the attack, the participants involved and the circumstances of the process. In this, participants can be referred to either actively or passively, to create sense of responsibility, e.g. “Hubby kicked out No-sex wife”, where the attacker can be held responsible for the process, yet the naming of the wife as a “No-sex wife” can give circumstances or reasons for the process that took place.

Furthermore, the attacker could be left alone altogether, hidden by the inexistence of naming, and thus transcending him above the realm of responsibility, e.g. “Girl 7, Murdered While Mum Drank At The Pub”. Appearing to shift blame to a third party, where they are portrayed and therefore received as just as bad as the criminal involved.

In relation to “The Sun”, Clarke suggests that such seemingly unethical practices, of manipulating language in order to cast people in terms of sexual availability or unavailability, to build sexually based stories. Handing their audience a “voyeuristic rather then sympathetic reading of events”. Claiming that “The Sun’s” style works towards it’s angle of “sex as a good sell”.

Clarke fears such practices. Viewing the defining of attackers as either “‘fiends” or “non-fiends” as a misrepresentation that suggests that only strangers can perform such vile sexual assault, with it impossible for a simple minded husband, or prominent sports star to be a rapist. As such, thus it must be the victims fault, no? Or if the husband did perform such a crime, surely there must be excusive reasons? (“Sex starved hubby”). “Matty johns accused of morally abusing ‘wanting’ teen”.

For further example, simply reminisce over recent major sporting headlines, where players accused of “gang-rape”, “sexual assault” or “drug charges”, are always excused of their actions, with headlines and leads of news reports always passing the blame off to their victim, or other events whereby the star was powerless.

“Andrew Johns used his drug use as a way of escaping depression”.

I rest my case.

The answer is a simple no.

Nick Couldrys text, ““The Extended Audience: Scanning the Horizon”, outlines an argument put forward by Longhurst and Abercrombie, establishing us as that of a “diffused” audience. One saturated by media consumption. This audience has converged media usage, seeing it pluralise and spread out all over society, ably accessed anytime and anywhere. For example, if I want to know last nights rugby leagues score, no longer must i wait until the 6pm channel 9 news bulletin, rather i can now simply pull out my mobile phone, connect to the internet, and oh look Canberra lost again.

Couldry also highlights Longhurts and Abercrombie’s belief of a changed social role of the audience , touching upon previously blogged views that the audience is no longer simply a receiver but  rather that “people are simultaneously performers and audience members”.

However, whilst Couldry partly accepts most of these views, he does not believe in Longhurst’s and Abercrombie’s arguement that “the need to study power relations (between the media and its audiences) is no longer as important”. Rather claiming that what he establishes as an “extended rather than diffused audience”  has created a new type of power relation with the media.

Couldry uses the recent “web cam” pheonomena as an example.  Outlining the “Dotcom guys” experiment where a ‘normal’ individual, such as you and I, put his life online, living infront of  a camera to ensure  every aspect of his day was filmed.

Abercrombie and Longhursts argument see this an a clear example of how the social division, between media and their audience, has broken down, claiming that the accessibility of individuals in producing media has diminished such a gap. Couldry, however, uses this as a clear example of how the ”domestication of media production” by the Dotcom guy, has created a glamorous view towards him, whereby viewed by millions of people a day, waiting for his every-next move. Then, when it all came to an end, audiences exclaimed  ‘oh well, we’re disappointed, but atleast now he can go back to his normal life’. Further highlighting the division between glamour of media and the boring normality of those not in it’s limelight. If i play football for Coogee then it’s just another normal game of footy, but if that game was filmed and then placed on channel 9 for viewing, i would be a celebrity.

However, whilst both arguements make logical sense, i still do not believe they are spot on in their definitions of a contemporary audience. It seems to me that audience are simply “active”. An audience that works to find new and increasingly technical ways in the exploration and consumption of media.  Increasingly converging different forms of media ‘internet/phone’ together in order to transcend the restrictions imposed by limiting types of media. Audiences now choose to view things when they want to, how they want to, and where they want to.

Audiences can choose what they wish to do with their media practices, both in a producer and receiver point of view. If they are unhappy with the supply or coverage by media on particular news story, e.g. the Matthew Johns scenerio, then they simply deliver their own views on it. Whether it be on You Tube, Facebook, or WordPress.com, audiences  now ensure their thoughts are known.

No longer is the power of what, and how something, is covered simply in the hands of the journalistic gate keepers. For audiences can now be heard along side them. However, when it comes to creditability, who are you more likely to believe?

Rizzo first identifies Foxtel IQ’s ability to transcend a structured way of viewing, avoiding broadcasting flows, that attempt to persuade the viewer to watch on. She establishes that, through the creation of an individuals own ‘personalised’ playlists, audiences have effectively undermined coercive broadcasting flows, as a channel has transformed into a “place to visit rather than a means to tune into at a certain time”.  Highlighting the IQ’s ability to shift the temporalities of time, Rizzo argues that the digital recording of programs sees an individual create their own “flow’, one based on engaging with the media how they wish. E.g myself recording each of my favourite NRL football teams matches, fore-going the live broadcast in order to watch when it best suits me.

Rizzo further highlights the growing creation of personalised and customisable playlists, through the online broadcasting channel “Youtube”.  Highlighting how individuals create playlists of broadcasts that refer to and consist of their specific interests, collating many adversely different types of broadcast media in order to create their own flow. Youtube thus enables the active participation in broadcasts and broadcasting, with individuals creating own schedules of use, as well as enabling a “spatial and temporal mode of viewing”. Rizzo also argues that YouTube, rather than producing social isolation, promotes and encourages the sharing of ideas and information, establishing networks and flows between individuals. A view that I tend to agree with, as just yesterday, I actively searched for information on bar tending ‘flaring’ techniques, in order to try and learn of new and exciting ways of entertaining my customers whilst at work. I did however, fail at every single trick.

The final means that Rizzo uses to identify the power switche from television broadcasting, towards other forms, is through the Apple Ipod and Itunes. Just like with YouTube, ”flow” is created through the ability for individuals to transcend above spatial and temporal realms, yet again given the opportunity to assert control of what they choose to watch and when. Customising the content displayed on the IPod, to suit their preferences. However, what makes the IPod even more notable it’s the creation of flow through it’s interaction with iTunes. With Itunes allowing the re-arrangment of media material, presented as playlists, in order to suit day-to-day needs of the user. Making certain playlists, for certain occasions. While one can also subscribe to their favourite broadcasted material and have it automatically downloaded to Itunes every week it’s aired. Connecting them to what they wish to view whilst giving them choices over when they are to view them. I could not go to an Arts1090 lecture, and simply download the lecture stream to hear everything that was said.

Ahh the convenience of creating your own “flow”.

These are the ideals and ideologies ably expressed and extended throughout Mizuko Ito’s text “Mobile Phones, Japanese Youth, and the Replacement of Social Contact”. His/her text works to embark upon a study of a selection of Japanese youths and their daily patterns of communication. Leading to his/her forthright conclusion whereby Japanese youths of today have transcended the social boundaries and communicative constraints of society. Including those previously imposed by the state, their tertiary institutions, and indeed by their parents.

However, rather then simply challenging these constraints on liberal communication, the youths of today have merely chosen to subvert them. Mizuko argues that this has been done through the stealth-like use of easily hidden SMS messages. Texting in lectures, in and around public ‘power structured’ places, and within the household, Japanese youths have found ways to communicate without causing any disruption to social normality. Yet, they constantly keep in touch with those close to them throughout day to day life, planning the events of their week and weekends without causing any sort of normative breach or abhorrent damage to typical Japanese societal systems. Thus, Mizuko argues, converging communication with the day-to-day processes of life.

Furthermore, Mizuko suggests that the youths of today have also used mobile phones, and the concept of “Mobility” that surrounds them, to avoid both censorship and monitoring of their communicative processes by their ‘power structuring’ parents. This notion of “mobility” suggests that youths are no longer forced to converse with friends within the nucleus of ones home, as was the case previous to mobile technology, forcing teenagers to use the home phone and allowing only extroversive phone calls. Rather, youths can now ably relocate when a call is received, initiating their conversations in an environment in which they feel most comfortable, ably expressing their deepest thoughts and feelings, without the fear of a parent or sibling overhearing what they are not meant to know. Avoiding censorship by the monolithic, household, all-knowing, guard dogs known as parents.  Thus highlighting Mizuko’s belief that mobile findings that mobile phones have “allowed youths to engage in chatter without challenging existing power structures” and without fear of “overbearing parent censorship”, in this instance, those things exclusive to the home environment,

Thus, the Japanese are geniuses. They have ably instilled a subversive system of communicative process that in no way impedes on, or challenges the, social value systems, and power structures, around them. Accepting the rules and regulations within public realms (such as public transport where it is rude, and thus unacceptable, to accept a voice call on a train), and fulfilling their communicative needs under the veil of SMS messaging. Societal values untouched, unharmed. A system not incorporated within Australian society, with us constantly making our private sphere available to the public realm.

“Maria lost her watch, Gabrielle cheated on Dave again!”

We, rather, are a hypocritical society that will stare at, and scold those, whom choose to engage in these conversations, but are guaranteed to embark upon those, ourselves when the opportunity arises. Is it impolite to take the call? Yes. A hindrance within society? Yes.

Yet we actively participate in doing so..

As aforementioned, the Japanese are geniuses.