Exegesis so far

Exegesis - Upload a Document to Scribd

Read this document on Scribd: Exegesis

Latest Abstract

The process of “extraordinary rendition”, which is practiced by the CIA, is being sanctioned and accepted by other Western nations around the world, despite the fact that it flies in the face of the Geneva Convention and the Declaration of Human Rights. However, the issue is not widely publicized and many Britons are unaware of the problem. Actors for Human Rights UK aims to tell the stories of men who have been victims of extraordinary rendition, to humanise them in the eyes of the general population, who may not know the human cost of this practice. How can AFHRUK use a viral marketing campaign to further spread its message about the wrongs being done in the name of the War on Terror and, in turn, promote their own programs?

Technology and evolution

Reading Danny Belkin's article about "The Internet Will Speed Up Human Evolution", I was reminded of a fact I read the other day (it might have been in The Good Weekend, the Number Crunch section). 10% of human life that has ever existed, exists now. At this moment in time, our world population makes up 10% of all the human beings who have ever lived. I find that phenomenal.

The reason Belkin's article brought this fact to mind for me was that it is a stark reminder of how quickly technology has changed us as a species just in the last 100 years. Advancements in medicine, education, transport, all of this has allowed us to live longer and procreate more. It's an extraordinary achievement, whether or not you believe it is actually a good thing or not.

At first reading, the suggestion that "The internet will speed up human evolution" seems preposterous. But Belkin's argument is compelling and comes from a theory about the very start of evolution, when single-celled organisms (or orgasms, as poor Liberal backbencher Jason Wood said the other day!) joined together, to create multi-celled organisms. He suggests that the internet is enabling a similar merger to occur, but on a far greater level. The merger of human and computer intelligence, the creation of "a human-computer meta-network". 

Improvements in communication have snowballed and accelerated developments in other scientific and cultural areas, the speed at which new technology is created can be seen as exponential, thus technology can be said to be adding to human's intelligence and therefore helping us to evolve. This much is easy to understand. But Belkin takes it one step further, saying "the merging of humans into an interconnected computer meta-network will eventually create a collective consciousness for all the individual participants."

Although I agree with the basis of his argument, Belkin's meta-network concept is hard for me to fathom. It sounds like an individual would have to sacrifice their own individuality and give themselves over to a new level of consciousness - like a Buddhist meditation but with computers. Perhaps my concerns can be seen as an extension of my concerns about existing technologies, such as Facebook, which, as previously discussed, I am uncomfortable using because I don't want to share that much of myself with this world. It could be suggested, therefore, that Belkin's idea is not ridiculous, because millions of people around the world are already prepared to give up some part of themselves and share it via the net.

Looking into the future, I also can't help but wonder whether some form of technology will beat us in the end. Not in the form of robots taking over the world, as Belkin mentions, but more in the form of some new aggressive mobile phone cancer, or all the radio waves pulsing around in the air shrinking our brains!

On that note, I would like to end on something more cheery. Please enjoy Flight of the Conchords with their Robot song...

Supervisor

I think I now have a supervisor for my project, Rachel Wilson. I met with Rachel yesterday and I think we're both on the same page about how to approach the project and what difficulties we might face. What's more, we've got friends in common! That's always a good sign! I think her background will be very helpful for me and she has already come up with some good ideas about who I can talk to and issues I should consider.

What question is my research project answering?

I hope to answer the question: "How can not-for-profit organisations use new media and the internet to raise the public's awareness about human rights issues?"

I mentioned the draft script, well here it is. Comments welcome.

Rendition Short Script - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: Rendition Short Script

The idea behind the script is that it is based on a section from the AFHR show "Rendition", which uses transcripts and real testimony from three guys who experienced the process of extraordinary rendition. I thought it would be best to make the campaign somehow in the style of AFHR, in order to raise awareness not only of the issue, but of how AFHR works as an organisation.

Dangers of Wikipedia

We were speaking in Comm Rev about Wikipedia and Google and the dangers involved in people taking what they're told for gospel without considering how and why the information is chosen. I mentioned a sketch by American satirist Stephen Colbert. See below:

http://spring.newsvine.com/_news/2006/08/01/307864-stephen-colbert-causes-chaos-on-wikipedia-gets-blocked-from-site

Unfortunately, the YouTube clip is being contested by Comedy Central for breach of copyright. Fair enough I suppose (but disappointing for this blog post!)

Potential challenges and problems

There are a number of challenges I can foresee with regards to my campaign for AFHR.

First of all, there's the target audience. Deciding on who the target audience is is bound up also with what we want to get out of the campaign. Do we want to convert people to the AFHR cause? Encourage donations? Or motivate existing supporters? Of course, if a campaign could do all three that would be ideal, but I'm not expecting to create the perfect awareness campaign, so we might have to be more specific! From my readings and research so far, I would expect that our best chance of success will be if we target people who are already sympathetic to the issues that AFHR engages in, but who either don't understand the Extraordinary Rendition issue or who don't know about AFHR's work. The aim of the campaign is therefore to direct people to the website where they can find out more about the issue and organisation (and even donate if they choose!)

It is here that we also start to discover the limitations of a viral campaign. Although cheap and with a potentially large audience, viral campaigns will target a younger market. There is nothing wrong with this per se, and it could be great for AFHR, but it has occurred to me previously that a potential audience for AFHR is the niche market known in political circles as "the doctors wives". This rather patronising term refers to middle aged, middle class women who are conservative politically but who are also kind and concerned with human rights. Their politics generally stems from their wealth and social circles, but they do not condone inhumane behaviour. This is a powerful group because, as the name suggests, they are connected to powerful people (or may be in positions of power themselves) and have previously been the turning point on issues such as the Vietnam War and refugees in Australia. AFHR should definitely consider targeting this group, but I don't think that viral marketing is the way to do it.

However, having said that, if we shoot our viral campaign on broadcast-quality high-definition video (I'll have to do some research into the best camera to use) then we can hope that, if the viral campaign achieves some success, we can then venture out into television. TV would be the best way to reach the middle aged women group, along with features in magazines and radio.

The other issue with viral marketing is that you have to give a reason for the receiver to pass it on. This will partly be helped by targeting already sympathetic viewers, who are more likely to want to share our campaign with their friends as a way of expressing their own views. However, if the 90 second ad engages people well enough, even those who were previously unsympathetic could be encouraged to pass it on. Engagement often comes down to an issue of emotion. Most virals are funny for this reason, engaging people's sense of humour. It would be a huge challenge to create a funny campaign around state-sanctioned torture, but I won't rule out the possibility just yet! We are more likely to engage with people with either shock value or a very moving piece.

These are the main challenges at the moment, in terms of creating the concept for our campaign. There will also be technical decisions to make (as touched upon above)... but those can wait for another month or so!

Long break

There has been quite a delay since my last post, but I have a good excuse, I was in the UK. Sure, they have computers and internet over there, so I could have still contributed to my blog, but I was super busy on a whirlwind tour, which was partly about my Hons research project.

I met up with Christine of the newly-named Actors for Human Rights. We discussed what issue she would like to focus on in a campaign and she resolutely said extraordinary rendition. Extraordinary rendition is the name given to the kidnapping of suspected terrorists by the CIA around the world, who are then held in secret prisons and are not allowed to contact their families, their embassies or legal representation. According to many accounts, they are also tortured. The practice gets a mention in Wikipedia and there is a fact sheet about it on the American Civil Liberties Union website. There was also a film about this released last year (starring Reese Witherspoon and Jake Gyllenhaal).

AFHR has a script about rendition which uses the testimony of three guys who each experienced rendition and were then released. They all claim torture and that the governments of their respective countries didn't help (one is British, one Canadian and one German). This will be used as the basis of our viral campaign.

We also talked about what we want the campaign to achieve. Essentially it will be about raising awareness of the issue as well as the profile of AFHR. We want to direct people to the website, where they will then be offered ideas about what they can do, which organisations are working in this area, booking a show by AFHR and how they can find out more information. Our target audience will probably already be left-leaning and sympathetic to human rights issues, but maybe they are unaware of the extent of the rendition problem and/or have never heard of Actors for Human Rights. Directing people to the website will also provide a way for us to track the success of our campaign to some extent, by keeping an eye on website hits etc.

More to come.

Why am I bothering?

According to The Age, all this going to classes and doing work is a waste of time...!
http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/pumping-out-diplomas/2008/04/24/1208743225063.html

Progress being made

I have been relieved to discover in the past few weeks that I'm enjoying researching my Hons project topic! That may sound strange, but I can sometimes get excited about the idea as a whole but get bored with the details of how to achieve it. Thankfully, it seems that won't be the case this year. Although it's only April. Still months to go...

The concept for my public awareness campaign will come together more clearly in the next month, after I have visited Christine in London and (hopefully) received Ethics approval.

In terms of the exegesis, my plan is to structure it in three parts: the theory/research on social marketing and how it works, an analysis of three different Australian public awareness campaigns and the impact that they've had on society, and an explanation of my process and the problems I had to overcome in order to make the campaign for AFR UK.

Ironically, AFR in Australia officially wound up on the weekend. I have been involved with the organisation for 7 years (since its inception) and I think we have achieved some amazing results (no more Pacific Solution, for example!) However, the organisation was starting to feel tired and less relevant than it had be when it started, so we agreed it was best to let it go. The website will remain (www.actorsforrefugees.org.au) because it offers a number of useful resources, but we will no longer take bookings and perform shows as a group. Sad, but also a relief in many ways.

Faces of Facebook

I really like this bog post from Tessa about how online spaces can mean your public and private worlds collide.

Check it out: 

http://tessatessa.wordpress.com/2008/04/13/why-im-opening-up-the-space-and-not-censoring-the-face/

I agree with Tessa that we all have different sides of our personality that we show to different people at different times: "I would argue that we all have multiple personalities, or perhaps more accurately one mulifaceited personality. Different social situations act as forums to express different elements of our personalities. I am a different person around my friends to what I am when I visit my grandparents or when I am at work. I use different language, discuss different topics and wear different clothes. I think what social media is doing is making it possible for these different personalities to cross over."

I like the idea that social media allows a person's various personalities to interact and cross over, although at the same time this is part of the reason why I think I have never wanted to join Facebook or MySpace! I'm a very private person, even this blogging that we have had to do for uni has been a struggle for me in some respects, and I have always been cautious about sharing all my personalities with the world. The idea of old school "friends" (who are not friends at all, and never really were) getting in contact with me now and finding out what I'm doing irks me. If someone is a genuine friend then we would have kept in touch, or they will find a way to track me down without Facebook. I consider myself to be such a different person than I was at high school (although that's probably not true!) that I don't like the idea of my present and my past colliding.

I was surprised to read in Tessa's post that she had a potential employer check her Facebook profile. I would find that invasive but, then again, as Tessa points out, if you want to share all your personalities with the world then you should be proud and comfortable to do so.

Perhaps one day I'll lose out on employment because I don't have a Facebook/MySpace site!

I still feel uncomfortable with the amount of information people put about themselves on the internet. It's like Big Brother is always watching and I feel I get chastised sometimes for not joining in, as though it's some kind of political rebellion I'm engaging in.

I should start a Facebook group, for people who have no intention of ever joining Facebook!

ABC - The Average, Boring Channel?

In The Australian today, ABC Director Mark Scott (who recently announced that the ABC's TV department will soon suffer major job losses) says he believes the ABC is an "incubator of Australian art and culture":

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23551193-7582,00.html

I beg to differ.

I am flabbergasted by how little drama the ABC invests in these days. I know they are short on money, but in 2007 they commissioned just over 20 hours of new Australian drama. 20 HOURS! That's not even one day's worth, back-to-back!

What's more, the drama they do commission is very rarely innovative or pushes the boundaries, the way the ABC could and should. The advantage the ABC is supposed to have over the commercial networks is that they don't have to worry about ratings or other commercial concerns but, as part of the corporatisation of everything these days, ABC management is more worried about ratings than quality or innovation.

Take East of Everything. I must confess to having only watched one episode, the first, but it gave me no inclination to return. It was almost exactly the same as SeaChange... but without the humour or the charm! So what's the point? The ABC are stuck in a constant rut trying to repeat their previous successes, not acknowledging that their highest-rating shows SeaChange, The Chaser, Pride & Prejudice, Choir of Hard Knocks) came out of the blue, and were different and new when they attracted those audiences.

Other examples of how the ABC is failing to encourage new talent and produce interesting drama shows is a story I heard about a friend who put his (really great) drama series into the ABC and was told his scripts were fantastic, "This is the kind of drama we should be making..." but they won't. Because it didn't match their target audience (ie: old people).

Perhaps Australia should reintroduce the TV license fee, as they have in the UK. The BBC is constantly innovative and takes risks on new writers/directors with interesting projects. They can afford to, however, as the TV license fees (which go straight into the BBC's pocket) mean that one network's drama budget is larger than all drama production in Australia combined (all the TV networks at the Film Finance Corporation).

Rather than just whinge about it, I plan on moving overseas! Along with many of my peers.

It's official, I'm a nerd!

I have become the stereotypical "mature age" student... I've finished my Comm Revs essay early! Wow. I would never have done that in my undergrad degree. Actually, I think I did once, and the essay got lost when I submitted it and I almost failed! So perhaps I should hold off submitting the essay too early!

Big business bytes

It's amazing that, although online media specifically, and the internet generally, has the potential to be such a democratising force, it is still big business that runs the show.

Reading this article in today's Age, 

www.theage.com.au/news/biztech/murdoch-could-join-microsoft-bid-for-yahoo/2008/04/11/1207856776806.html, I couldn't help but be struck by the massive amount of money that gets thrown around as part of these high-end corporate takeovers. These are two of the world's biggest companies who are trying to control another huge company, Yahoo, which holds the key to information about consumers (through their internet searches and email) and controls much of cyberspace. The internet offers opportunities for anyone who has access to a computer and a modem to contribute their thoughts and views, and yet it still gets taken over by the big boys every time.

I'm reminded of Orwell's 1984. The way everyone was constantly surveyed. We have to deal with consistent surveillance when we are outside our homes, on most streets and in most shops nowadays, and although we don't have video camera surveillance necessarily in our homes these days (like the Telescreens in 1984) we do inadvertently tell Big Brother what we are doing and what we are thinking about by using the internet. Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are watching us! Scary stuff.

Online Gaming

Reading the article by Jakobsson and Taylor in the Transient Spaces reading, I was struck by a few things. Firstly, how similar the game they described (EverQuest) is to World of Warcraft (is it, in fact, an older version of the same game? I've never heard of EQ) and also how different their experience of online gaming was to the experience that is usually described in the media.

I have played some WOW. Over the summer holidays my boyfriend signed me up. I would only login once a week/fortnight but it can be a fun time-waster if that's what I need. Too busy nowadays to be looking for time-wasters!

Although I can see how people find the game addictive, I find that I get bored quite easily now, as compared to when I first started. The addictive quality comes mostly from the endless nature of the game: you are constantly offered new quests, and numerous quests at the same time, so you never "finish" or "win". But this starts to get frustrating, you can feel that you're going around in circles.

What starts to suck players in further, I think, is the formation of online relationships/bonds with other players, as described in the Jakobsson/Taylor article. Guilds and less official groups are formed, loyalties are created and regular meeting dates might be established, which gives the players an emotional connection to the game and therefore adds to their experience. I have probably never committed enough time to form these bonds. Except for my "RL" bond with my boyfriend!

MMORPGs are often given flack in the media, however, for alienating people and further disconnecting our society, which is already splintered by communication forms that don't encourage face-to-face interaction. However, I don't think that most people would ever want to replace online friendships with live ones, unless they are already prone to loneliness or are in some other way antisocial and struggle to communicate one-on-one. So it could be seen as offering an opportunity and hope to people who otherwise wouldn't form relationships or communicate with humans.

Your thoughts? Are we further alienating people by giving them the opportunity to not mix in society?

While you think, have a look at the trailer for "Make Love Not Warcraft", a Southpark episode from Series 10. Highly recommended you watch the ep!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_VwonZxuFM

Bad habits

I know, I know... I've been a bad blogger. I haven't posted for almost a week. I've failed in my duties. I won't go into too much detail, but this week has been crazy busy. It has involved: extra work (at the ADF), a major relationship decision, stress and worry about a major film project, hurried organisation for a brief overseas jaunt happening next month, the discovery of more uni work that I wasn't aware of, and attempts to see all my friends who are performing in the comedy festival! So I hope you'll forgive me.

As a peace offering, those of you who enjoy a good old Mac vs PC debate will no doubt love this Danny Katz article from The Age today:

http://www.theage.com.au/news/danny-katz/praise-be-to-the-lord-our-jobs/2008/04/09/1207420476347.html

I'll write more on Friday. No more excuses, I promise...

Dark side of online spaces

There is always a lot of media when something goes "wrong" with one of the big online community sites, such as MySpace or Facebook. This article was in The Age yesterday:  http://www.theage.com.au/news/web/craigslist-hoaxers-arrested/2008/04/03/1206851064915.html

There have also been stories about bullying, murder and suicide pacts. The temptation always seems to be to blame the media form itself for provoking or invoking these incidents, but that is an over-simplified and unhelpful assumption to make. 

Online bullying, for example, is a terrible trend that seems to be growing, but bullying has always occurred and I can't see how online/mobile phone bullying could be worse than old forms of bullying. Receiving a threatening note (or "poke"!) via Facebook is no less scary than getting a nasty note left in your locker, which is the traditional form of girl bullying.

The argument is that online bullying follows the kids home, but psychologically, bullying always follows the victim wherever they go, it's part of the psychology of being bullied.

I'd be interested in other points of view on this issue, if you have any insights?

Global Security

From our Comm Revs tute yesterday, one issue that we didn't discuss, in terms of globalisation and how new communication technologies have changed humanity's world view, is the issue of security.

Before the printing press, people would have been only concerned with the security of their family and of their own village, having little access to knowledge or information about villages in other parts of the country. However, with the creation of print and therefore the solidification of the concept of the nation state (according to many of our readings), the public would have become concerned about national security, having a geographical US vs THEM mentality. The next step, with the advent of televisiona and then the internet, has been a focus on global security. This has less to do with geographical borders and more to do with political ideologies and/or culture clashes. It is the logic behind the War on Terror; it is not America's war, it is a global war, or so we are told.

I would argue that even the previous World Wars were halfway between a national security issue and the global focus we have today.

Anyone care to comment?

New media - its implications for old media

Having recently sat through two very different but equally awful (in my view) pieces of theatre (I won't be naming names, but they were major theatre companies!) I started to reflect on what theatre needs to do in order to remain relevant.

The problem that theatre has, as a medium, is that we now have conflicting expectations of what we want from live drama. On the one hand, being as film and television literate as we are, we expect realistic performances and a certain degree of "drama", or conflict/tension in the script. On the other hand, realism in theatre is in many ways a dead medium, because so many other mediums do it better (espeically television). With the advent of online docos and videos, this has shifted even further, as we now have a medium that emphasises the "voyeuristic", thus making the realism seem even more real.

What theatre can offer, as opposed to newer mediums, is a greater suspension of disbelief, as well as an added tension to the audience's experience because they are watching the drama unfold live. Thus, absurdism and surrealism work, arguably, better in a live theatrical space than they do on the cinema screen, where people's expectations for believability are higher. The other genre (for want of a better word) that theatre excels at is the live thriller. Not necessarily in a conventional murder mystery kind of way, but when you see events unfold live on stage, there are great opportunities to build up tension, and the audience starts to emit tension, as well as feeling it, so it loops back on itself and makes for an exciting evening.

One of the best examples of the latter genre of theatre that I've ever seen was Pillowman, by Irish playwright Martin McDonagh, which was presented by the MTC last year. I usually dislike the MTC's work, but this piece was utterly compelling. It combined elements of surrealism and absurdism into a show about murder, torture and childrens' stories. Apparently many of the MTC subscribers (read, the Blue Rinse Set) walked out. That is my definition of great theatre!

Online doco progress

I was very lucky over the weekend, I found 2 great connections for my Transient Spaces online doco. First of all, I remembered that my boyfriend went to school with Julian Hill, who was the head of Melbourne 2030 and now works for the State Government Department of Planning, so I'll be giving him a call to get a government perspective on development in outer Melbourne (especially Melton).

Secondly, I was talking to my lovely friend Liz, who said that her partner is an urban planner who is currently working on a development at Melton!

So I will have the Sudanese family as a case study of Melton residents, alongside the official government view and the opinions of an urban planner who has to deal with the problems of developing housing and retail spaces in the outer suburbs. A nice, balanced approach I think.

Snack TV - pt 2

Another aspect of short-form drama that I have been musing on since reading the article in The Age is how strongly online/digital drama formats have been pushed by the "money people", ie: film funding bodies such as Film Victoria, AFC and also the ABC. I find that their focus on new media is out of proportion in relation to the number of new media practitioners in Australia and also the audience for new media content.

Digital platforms have created a great new resource for filmmakers and other artists to express themselves and connect with an audience at relatively little cost. The push and drive to be exploring these new technologies should be coming from the artists themselves, as well as from the audience/consumers. However, in our current system, bodies like Film Victoria are using these technologies from the outside in, placing a huge emphasis on new media projects at the expense of more traditional media projects. I see this as having two negative side-effects. One is that the digital media created is actually a traditional drama form forced into a new media cross-platform technology, as opposed to a drama that organically uses the digital form. Secondly, throwing money at new media may make funding bodies look hip and cool, but part of the joy of digital technologies is how cost-effective they can be, which opens up opportunities to new artists and should need less money.

Of course there should be funding for these new media projects, but I think that decisions about how much to fund should come from how many media practitioners out there are using this form and how much they actually need to do it well (and make a living). There's a joke going around the filmmaking community at the moment that any application for film funding or for the ABC needs to use the words "new media" or it is doomed to fail!

Frankly, I think funding of new media projects would be better coming from commercial sources, such as Telstra, Optus or Foxtel. The commerical/business world is much better at being up-to-date and is also aware of what their audience wants. Business is about providing for the consumer, and government funding bodies should be about providing opportunities to artists. If each focused on their particular task, in relation to all areas, not just new media, we could probably get the balance right.

"Snack TV" - the rise of short form digital drama

There is an interesting article in The Age I came across today about the increasing number of short form dramas being made in Australia and around the world for consumption/viewing on mobile phones and onine platforms. The article, The Rise of Snack Drama, focuses especially on two Victorian-made series, Forget the Rules and Girl Friday, as well as looking at the international phenomenon of Lonelygirl15 (YouTube) and quarterlife.

After watching a few episodes of Forget the Rules and Girl Friday, I have bee struck by how traditional they are in terms of story content. The former especially, which comes across as a 3-min version of Secret Life of Us but set in Fitzroy instead of St Kilda. The creator of Forget the Rules is quoted in The Age as saying that free-to-air TV networks are too "conservative" to produce drama for young people anymore, but I have to say that the content of his online show doesn't seem to stray too far from the conservative anyway. The problem we are left with is that TV executives don't want youth drama because young people don't watch TV much anymore, however in transforming these shows into a short format I think that a great deal is lost. Forget the Rules and Girl Friday both have a very sketch-like quality to them, because it is very difficult (some would say impossible) to engage with an audience emotionally in only 2-3 minutes. Compared with Secret Life, This Life or Love My Way, we do not have the opportunity to get drawn into the characters' lives and therefore be moved as well as entertained (Love My Way, end of season one. Gut-wrenching).

Girl Friday is a more successful example of using short-form drama in a digital context because it plays up the comedy element (over-the-top performances, fantasy sequences etc) and also it uses the technology as part of the story. The first episode is about finding a mobile phone on a tram and trying to track down its owner. It also has many layers of potential interactivity for the audience, so the viewer can choose how much to engage with the program.

However, the most successful use of these new technologies, in my opinion, is the LonelyGirl15 series which screened on YouTube. The Age referred to this program as "controversial" because it didn't tell its audience that it was a scripted drama, viewers thought they were watching a teenage girl's video diary, but this is exactly why it is so clever. It plays on the idea of voyeurism and uses a new technology and entertainment in order to make a point. People use the internet and YouTube to, for want of a better word, spy on other people around the world. In finding out that LonelyGirl15 was actually an actor reading a script, perhaps it made people contemplate the morality and potentially exploitative nature of watching people's personal lives.

Video

Here is a video my dad (and I) made about the Sudanese Australian Integrated Learning Program, which is a tutoring service in Melbourne. Sadly, he has had a number of racist comments added to the YouTube site. Why do people feel the need to add such hate to the world?

Ethics

All the ethics approval for our Hons project sounds quite complicated! I'm worried about issues around using an existing script that is based on true stories from asylum seekers and refugees (as AFR does). Will I have to get ethics approval to use the stories, even though I didn't do the interview? Will AFR's permissions be sufficient? Is the fact that they are anonymous enough?

I will have to arrange with Christine to ensure she has access to a counsellor in case the actors get distressed by the material they are using.

One of AFR's key methods to humanise asylum seekers is to have actors telling the stories of refugees in their own accent/voice. So that the vocabulary is that of someone for whom English is a second language, but the accent doesn't necessarily match the use of language. This encourages the audience to listen to the stories rather than put the storyteller in a racial or cultural box. I think that any awareness campaign for AFRUK should use a similar method somehow. More thought needed.

Other academic references - quantitative research

Problems with quantitative research, references:

"Clinical research with sheep is often constrained to use small samples. This places additional strains on traditional Frequentist statistical analyses: the results tend to lack statistical power, so there is a high likelihood that they will not be statistically significant. In addition, it is difficult to combine the results of more than one study."

P. J. Cripps; “Statistical and epidemiological methodology for sheep research: The needs, the problems, the solutions”
Small Ruminant Research
Volume 76, Issues 1-2, April 2008, Pages 26-30


Quantitative research best in order to back up other research. If a theory or problem is not already well understood then qualitative research is needed before a quantitative study is conducted.

John W. Creswell
Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches
p.22

Transient Spaces - Online Doco

I have been thinking of ideas for my "online" doco as part of Transient Spaces. The concept is quite new to me, although I can imagine how it will work and I have heard of online docos, I had just never considered how one would go about making one before.

A number of potential topics spring to mind based around the theme of "community". The first thought that came to my head when presented with the topic was a Sudanese family who are friends of my family. I think I associate them with "community" because their community is so strong and the ties that bind the Sudanese in Australia come, not only from shared cultural and racial/family links, but also from the shared experience of being a migrant community in a new country and the trauma of escaping from a warzone and all the emotional/psychological baggage that comes with that.

My thoughts then moved on to a more literal, physical community, which is actually where this Sudanese family live, and that is in Melton. Melton is literally the end of Melbourne, the last sub/urban landscape before rural Victoria begins. There are a number of new developments in the area and the land is cheap relative to other Melbourne suburbs. Some of these developments are pitched as "communities", which begs the question in my mind, can you create a community? Does building houses together, isolated from other housing estates, force the residents to become a community? I think this could make an interesting study.

Finally, I have been thinking of online communities, especially massive multi-player online gaming communities. My boyfriend plays World of Warcraft a couple of times a week, and I have played it too (but not as regularly) and he is adamant that playing games in this way creates new communities, rather than necessarily isolates people, as is often suggested. He argues that the way that WOW is setup, in order for a player to get the most out of the game and move up the levels they have to co-operate with other players, show generosity and share ideas and tactics. Some "quests" require more than one player to complete them, and at the top end they can require up to 25 players who must all communicate and co-operate in order to complete the quest. My boyfriend says that he has had intimate conversations with people from all over the world, and people he would not ordinarily meet in daily life, and that can only be a positive thing because it creates understanding and respect for others. Even though they look like elves!

So three potentially fertile subjects. Any comments or ideas are welcome.

Other academic references - quantitative research

Problems with quantitative research, references:

"Clinical research with sheep is often constrained to use small samples. This places additional strains on traditional Frequentist statistical analyses: the results tend to lack statistical power, so there is a high likelihood that they will not be statistically significant. In addition, it is difficult to combine the results of more than one study."

P.J. Cripps; “Statistical and epidemiological methodology for sheep research: The needs, the problems, the solutions”; Small Ruminant Research;  Volume 76, Issues 1-2, April 2008, Pages 26-30; Weblink


Quantitative research is best used in order to back up other research. If a theory or problem is not already well understood then qualitative research is needed before a quantitative study is conducted.

John W. Creswell; Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Method Approaches
p.22; Weblink

One step closer

I checked with Christine about whether she's happy for me to take on a project to create a viral awareness campaign for her and she is... phew! That could have been awkward!

New abstract

Very few Britons understand their government's policy and obligations towards asylum seekers or why asylum seekers are coming to their country to seek refuge in the first place. This is leading to more vocal expressions of anti-refugee sentiments (as distinct from anti-immigration views) from far-right groups, politicians, the media and members of the public. Actors for Refugees UK aims to tell the stories of refugees and asylum seekers, to humanise them in the eyes of the general population, who may never have met a refugee in person. How can AFRUK use a viral marketing campaign to further spread its message of compassion and reach a larger audience?

A decision has been made

I've been thinking things over for a week now, asking my friends and family for their opinions, and I think that I am going to change my final project from the thesis on marketing religion to creating a viral public awareness campaign for AFHR UK.

Doing the exercise about "Is it worth asking the question?" started to push me towards the awareness campaign idea more, because it has much stronger answers to the question of "who" it is for and also its relevance to my future career. Ultimately I am considering two career paths (and in this day and age it's likely I'll get to do both!) Plan A is to work as a film director, of features and television drama. And in acknowledgment of the fact that Plan A will be difficult and might never happen, Plan B is to work in communications for the not-for-profit sector, particularly an advocacy group. A project where I create a campaign for a worthwhile cause, and research the effectiveness of such campaigns and how they have succeeded in the past, will benefit both Plan A and B!

Another factor that has contributed to my decision is that the marketing Christianity idea was supposed to be for a doco, and I think it would make a better doco than it would thesis. However, to make the documentary to the standard that I would want requires some kind of funding. The plan was to shoot some observational footage, so that it's not just talking heads, and that means shooting hours and hours of tape and hiring a decent cinematographer and sound recordist so that you don't miss any crucial event and/or line. We would also have to spend a week in Sydney observing World Youth Day and to make the interviews look decent we need to hire lights and ideally also have a crew that knows what they're doing (I'm not a DOP!) We have pitched the film to the ABC (twice! Don't ask...), SBS and the FFC. There are no more funding options (because Film Vic and AFC require a free-to-air broadcaster attached).

Also in relation to the above point, because I've been working on the idea for 18 months I'm not confident that I will still be passionate and excited about it by the end of this year. Frankly, I could write a thesis about it tomorrow, but I want this year to involve me going on a journey and discovering new ideas. I already know what I think the answer to my thesis question is, so what's the point of asking it?

I'll write my new abstract tomorrow.

Problems with Quantitative Research

“a research finding is less likely to be true when the studies conducted in a field are smaller; when effect sizes are smaller; when there is a greater number and lesser preselection of tested relationships; where there is greater flexibility in designs, definitions, outcomes, and analytical modes; when there is greater financial and other interest and prejudice; and when more teams are involved in a scientific field in chase of statistical significance.”

John P. A. Ioannidis
“Why Most Published Research Findings Are False”
Public Library of Science (PLOS) Medical Journal, Vol 2, #8, August 2005
medicine.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371%2Fjournal.pmed.0020124

In summary, problems can arise with:

- Small sample size
- No other studies/stats to build on
- Different methods of gathering stats
- Prejudice on part of researchers/funding
- Competition from other researchers

Is it worth asking the question? Pt 2

What sort of media campaign could/should be employed in order to raise awareness of human rights abuses in the UK by a group such as Actors for Human Rights?

Who is it for? - Actors for Human Rights UK, but also other human rights organisations that are struggling to attract attention to their cause and raise public awareness of their issue.

Why ask? - Because it could do some good in the world.

Is it viable? - Could be a lot of work, but I would have all the resources I need access to.

Am I passionate? - Definitely. There is almost nothing I am more passionate about. And finding the best ways to spread the word about what human rights abuses are going on around the world (I would probably focus on just one, in consultation with Christine from AFHR UK). People are really good at removing themselves from an issues and the idea behind any kind of media/new media campaign would be to engage the public emotionally and give them hope that they can do something about it.

Is it relevant?  - It's more relevant directly to my career, because Christine might have some work for me in London at the end of the year. So this would no doubt help!

Is it worth asking the question?

Perhaps by working through these questions, I'll be able to establish which of my potential topics is most worthwhile for me.

- Who is it for?

- Why ask the question?

- Is the project/thesis viable?

- Am I passionate about it?

- Is it relevant (to why I want to do Hons/my future)?

Is marketing Christianity like a product the only way the faith will survive?

- In some ways this is just for me, out of interest. Some churches might be interested in my results, but essentially the question in philosophical, so most church leaders and members will already know what they think. I would love to pitch the finished thesis to an academic journal, probably one that focuses on marketing issues or religion, but I'll wait and see if it's any good first!

- This question always raises so many other questions and peaks the interest of almost anyone I speak to. Obviously I don't expect to come up with a definitive answer, but I hope that asking the question will stir up some interest (and maybe some controversy) from the people who read the project and will encourage them to think about how our consumer-driven lives have changed the world, or whether Christianity has always marketed itself to potential converts (the Crusades??)

- This thesis is definitely viable.

- I'm passionate about it this topic, despite the fact that I'm not actually religious (or even "spiritual"). I am nonetheless interested in religion and the philosophical questions/conundrums that it poses (both within the religion and in religion's interaction with society at large)

- The topic is relevant to my aims with regards to Honours, because I'm keen to explore a topic that interests me in detail and challenge my written skills with regards to writing a thesis. However, I can't see it having an impact on my career in any more specific way. 

Other options

I came up with yet another idea after talking to Adrian about my thesis/project. Adrian suggested that, since I am interested in public advocacy and social justice that I would be better off doing a project around a social justice campaign.

This lead to me thinking about Actors for Refugees, with which I have been involved for about 7 years. AFR has even crossed the ocean, to the UK, and is about to expand to become Actors for Human Rights, run by a friend of mine, Christine Bacon. I could do a project for AFHR UK and create a viral marketing campaign for Christine to raise awareness of asylum seeker issues in the UK. I know she would be keen on something along those lines because awareness-raising is a big part of her charter/mission.

To check out the amazing stuff Christine does, have a look at www.iceandfire.co.uk/actorsforrefugees/

Or I could just stick to my original thesis idea.

Any thoughts or ideas from you would be appreciated! I'd like to have my decision finalised by the week after Easter so that I can get stuck in... to whatever it is...!

Doubts about my thesis topic - already!

With the news this week about PM Kevin Rudd focusing on binge drinking, including a "scare" campaign to discourage young binge drinkers, I'm considering a thesis that investigates the effect and/or usefulness of government education campaigns, including those that set out to shock and frighten people.

When did they start? Do they work? Why/why not?

Working at the Australian Drug Foundation I'll have access to lots of great resources and people to explore a topic like this.

Then again, I've already been working on the other topic for about a year! Hmmmm.

What is research?

To me research is essentially an exploration of other people's ideas, which you then use to form your own opinions.

It can also be seen as a search for the facts, the "who/what/why/where/when" information. But facts are slippery and, in many cases, impossible to pin down. Research invariably discovers differing and sometimes contradictory views about issues or events, which the researcher has to sort through and give weight to.

Why Honours?

Good question actually. I've been so busy the past few weeks that thought has occurred to me on numerous occasions.

But I am excited about it, so I suppose the answer lies in that gut feeling.

Last year, while researching a doco, I started to miss doing formal research and exploring new ideas. In some ways I missed something I'd never had, because during my undergrad Arts degree I didn't take most of the subjects seriously and was more interested in the extra-curricula possibilities that Melbourne Uni offered, especially theatre. However, the subjects that I did get excited about at the time still come to my mind years later.

Doing Honours for me will be mostly about the opportunity to write a thesis. To get really stuck into a subject and stretch myself intellectually. In Arts you skim over so many different areas and ideas that you never get the chance to explore anything properly. 

Secondary to that will be the chance to meet some new people and have some great conversation!

It could also open the door for more study later on in my life. Although I'm just concentrating on getting through this year first before I think about that!

Project abstract

The number of young Australians who identify themselves as members of a traditional Christian church is dropping, despite the fact that many consider themselves to be "spiritual". This is causing a crisis among the leading established churches, who risk becoming irrelevant in the future. However, the smaller churches that seem to be actually increasing their membership are using blatant marketing techniques in order to connect with the consumer-savvy Generation Y. The question for the big churches is, is this the way of the future: should faith be branded and marketed like any other product?