backseatgaming episode001.mp3 – backseatgaming

In this first episode we struggle to get used to podcasting, discuss Mirror’s Edge and discuss a fan made Mirror’s Edge tribute you can watch below.

Working to Play in a Digital Age

Introduction
A new era of digital entertainment is upon us and it seems that no longer are we restricted in the ways in which we interact with technology for the purpose of entertainment. In the most basic sense we are no longer are limited to a predetermined scheduling of television programs, if we can afford and choose such a feature. More complexly, no longer are we restricted to the boundaries of our physical reality when seeking out technologically enhanced entertainment. Such is the case with the internet and video games. With statements such as these it would seem that the advancement of technology and media has allowed for us the ability to partake in greater experiences in leisure, that which we seek to obtain apart from the daily grind of work. Yet these statements alone would only represent a technologically determined thinker’s work. A more appropriate consideration of the effects of technology on work and leisure would consist of an assessment of not only technology, but apply a broader range of theory, ranging from an analysis of the reasons in which content is produced, and perhaps to the point of consumption as well. What will ultimately be argued in this essay is that an analysis of commodification of culture in a digital age will find that the line between work and leisure has become perpetually indistinct.

A Move towards Understanding Free Time
The need to assess what the new and coming digital age means to the areas of work and leisure requires a consideration of where the boundaries between work and leisure lie. Critical theorist Theodor Adorno would argue that “free time is shackled to its opposite” (Adorno 187). To Adorno, free time exists only as a form of work (Adorno 187). Adorno argues this by taking a Marxist approach to the subject of work and leisure by claiming that the existence and nature of free time is directly related to the capitalist mode of production (Adorno 188-191). This fits well as a theoretical approach to the issue of free time, work, and the digital age when considered in relation to Adorno and Horkheimer’s work on culture industry. To Adorno and Horkheimer the culture industry is seen as the commodification of mass culture and as a product of the capitalist economy (Bernstein 9). The significance of this lies in the fact that to assess free time in relation to work in a digital age means a turn to an assessment of the notion of culture as commodity. An understanding of the entertainment we choose to take up our free time in relation to its base in capitalist economy is one that is needed in a theoretical approach to understanding the boundaries between work and free time.

The intent of this critical approach is to assume that free time and work are becoming indistinct from one another due to the effects of a cultural industry as Adorno and Horkheimer would suggest (Bernstein 9). But as technology gains for the user more “freedom”, this assumption becomes the subject of debate. The question that is to be asked then becomes, how much of free time is autonomous to the user even when provided with the looming promise of technological progress. To answer this, an examination of current forms of technological entertainment is needed. Such an application will allow for a greater understanding of the extent of such a theory, in the sense of where this approach succeeds and where it fails. The focus will revolve around technology without becoming too broad by covering first the seemingly most familiar form of technological entertainment, television, and then path it’s transition on to the internet, of which will also be analysed. From there a critical analysis of video games, internet social spaces, and commodification of those users will be realised.

The Commodification of Free Time in a Digital Age
In Simulation and Social theory, Cubitt analyses Adorno and Horkheimer’s culture industry in relation to simulation theory (25-28). He outlines the two authors’ argument of the utilization of technology by capitalism a means for oppression and states that due to the enlightened rationality behind technology, Adorno and Horkheimer would see this as instrumental reason (Cubitt 26). As Cubitt notes, in Adorno and Horkheimer’s case this would lead to an exploitation of the human mind that is characteristic of the modern period (26). Cubitt uses Marcuse’s work to illustrate the notion that technological and instrumental reason can be taken as integrated into all facets of society and thus produce totalitarianism through the reduction of freedom to freedom to conform (26). While Cubitt considers this “unfashionable”, the implications of such a theory may merit worth when considered in an analysis of the relationship between free time and work (26).

When considering Cubitt’s reading of Adorno and Horkheimer, the suggestion of finding leisure within new forms of technological enhancements becomes an interesting one when arguing that technology may be subject to the economic factors that may govern its role. It would be appropriate then to consider the technology in a critical analysis of free time and work, to find out what factor it plays in answering the question of technological progress and free time. Thus, the framework of free time and work being subject to the effects of a cultural industry applied to the technologies influencing of free time would be appropriate. A look first at television will be necessary as to assess the prior limitations of technologies ability to enhance free time before assessing how these limitations translate into newer technologies that are meant to enhance the user’s experience of free time. Subsequently, a shift to the internet as the focal point of analysis will be made.

In Tapping into TiVo Matt Carlson first considers the previous ways in which audiences were set to receive information and entertainment from their television sets (Carlson 99-102). Carlson considers here the idea of control, and argues not for an authoritarian concept of control, but the notion that audiences must be built, that is they must want to view the content (Carlson 99-100). However Carlson moves on to suggest the scheduling of television and compares it to a transportation system arguing that it develops routine patterns which are integral to the integration of advertising content (100). What Carlson is arguing here is that the form of the technology was utilized in a way to allow for the commodification of audiences through analysis of patterns and scheduling (99-102). However Carlson shifts his argument to a new technology, the digital video recorder (DVR), which is seemingly enhancing television for audiences (102-103). What Carlson argues is that the DVR technology, specifically TiVo, is allowing service providers more options in the commodification of audiences (105-106). Some advantages seen are not only more television being watched by audiences, but rising value in previously lacking time slots due to time shifting capabilities and the capability for collection of user usage data (Carlson 105-106). Carlson’s argument begins to resemble Adorno’s notion of how we work for the leisure industry in our free time (190-191). This can also be seen in the arguments of Siapera.

Eugenia Siapera takes the audience as commodity argument into the realm of the internet by examining television and its relation to the internet audience. Siapera’s work can offer not only a bridge between understanding these two digital technologies, but provide groundwork for understanding audience commodification on the internet. Siapera suggests here that television websites are using the internet primarily in the same way it works to address audiences through its own medium, through the televisual, and because of this the potential of the internet as a medium will not be reached by this transition (156). Siapera finds that television audiences are treated the same online as they are treated offline yet makes an argument for the way audiences are primarily addressed (167-168). Siapera argues that the dominant mode of address is that of the audience as consumer, and an example of television sites providing online shopping links is given (167-168). Siapera’s work read in succession to Carlson’s offers an image of how Adorno’s notion of unfreedom can be read to transcend technologies as well as aspects of free time (188).

Through a direct look at the internet itself it is possible to see a more direct approach to treating the audience as consumers or commodities with arguments made by Campbell and Carlson. In their essay, the two compare internet surveillance techniques to Bentham’s conception of the Panopticon (Campbell et al. 586-587). The authors suggest that these surveillance techniques take the form of information gathering and aggregation which are used to control audiences (Campbell et al. 587). The two then suggest that the technology of surveillance, with regards to Bentham’s Panopticon coupled with internet surveillance, can be read as a critical aspect of the capitalist state (Campbell et al. 587). With this an example of the technique of utilizing technology for the assurance of worker efficiency is provided (Campbell et al. 587). With this the authors argue that the marketplace and capitalist workplace show parallels, suggesting that technology is employed by marketers to reduce uncertainty within the marketplace, and to increase advertising efficiency (Campbell et al. 587-588).

One of the more interesting arguments made by Campbell and Carlson is the notion that we exchange our privacy in order to participate (591-594). The two argue that consumers give into transactions that lack equity because marketers have concealed what Campbell and Carlson call the “consumerist Panopticon” (591-592). The two conclude their essay by considering the ability for us to choose whether or not we want to participate in this form of electronic surveillance, and conclude that since we have no control over the conditions of the marketplace, the power relations lack equity (603). Because of this, we tend to see ourselves at a disadvantage, and choose to sacrifice privacy in order to get ahead in the economic and social spheres (603). This argument renders it possible to see parallels between technology as well as the issue of free time and work through a medium in which free time is sought to be expended. Consumers give up freedom proper in order to participate in something that promises freedom within free time.

Authors Chung and Grimes essay Data Mining the Kids sees the previously mentioned methods of marketers applied to the realm of online video game websites. The authors argue that youth oriented video game based websites subject users to privacy issues that parallel the ones explored by Campbell and Carlson. However Chung and Grimes further examine how privacy is forfeited by users in order to gain more ground in the video games hosted by the sites, which appears to be the case with Neopets.com (535-536). As the authors note, Neopets.com gives users the option of filling out additional surveys that span a number of different topics and preferences in exchange for “Neopoints” which are then redeemable as a form of in-game currency (Chung et al. 536). It is also worth noting that for these websites one must create a unique online identity that allows for easier tracking of user preferences by marketers (Chung et al. 536). This argument begins to highlight the key aspect of the free time and work consideration, that being the understanding of the content and the experience of the user, which can be seen through the example of the video game content and experience being directly affected by the commodification of the user.

Free time as work
In an analysis of free time and work at the level of the user experience a turn to videogames as the central focus will allow for a more concise argumentative path to be taken. What has been argued previously is that technology is subject to influence by the same forces which are responsible for the mixing of free time and work, that being the effects of a capital driven culture industry as defined by Adorno and Horkheimer (Bernstein 9). By examining merging of work and game content it is possible to see that it is not only the technology, but how the experience of the user plays a key role in answering the question of free time and work. With the technology of video games the experience relies around the content and form of the game. The question then becomes, what can be seen from an analysis of video games as sites of free time as work?

Keeping in line with the previous image of working for in-game content it is possible to provide examples that will illustrate the seemingly dire situation of the video game experience. Nick Yee makes a similar argument in The Labor of Fun in which he considers the notion of video games blurring the line between work and leisure. Yee focuses on the video game genre of massively multiplayer online role playing games (MMORPG) in his analysis of games and work. Yee argues that in order for games to be successful, the player must perform work without becoming aware that it is work that they are performing and suggests that this serves the purpose of training users to “work harder” while at the same time enjoying the game (70). This argument is similar to one Adorno makes in his essay on free time in which he argues that free time should not be similar to work in order for the individuals abilities at the workplace to be enhanced (190). Yee suggests that the form of the game is intended to be designed to make players enjoy working by rewarding them for such work, which is a trait Yee links to behaviour conditioning (70).

An example of this can be seen provided by Yee with Star Wars Galaxies (69). Yee notes how players in the game have the option of pharmaceutical manufacturing (69). Yee then notes not only the complicated procedures one must consider, but the amount of time that must be invested in what players consider fun (69). Further, this argument can be demonstrated by noting that the word “grind” or “grinding”, which roughly means to perform repetitive tasks in order to further ones position within a game, has become ubiquitous within video game culture. The example of the pharmaceutical manufacturing provided by Yee could be read as grinding. Yee concludes by noting the work of Beck and Wade who seem to follow a line of thought similar to Adorno’s reasoning and suggest that the corporate world will have to adjust to the new gamer generation, but suggest that this conclusion misses the point (70). However despite Yee’s conclusion, the work of Beck and Wade can still speak for an analysis of free time and Work.

As noted earlier Beck and Wades work Got Game argues that businesses will be affected by the gamer generation through the skills they bring to the workplace. The authors argue that managers will be able to observe a competitive attitude within the game playing generation and suggest that to gamers winning matters (Beck et al. 81). Beck and Wade argue that this is because the game playing experience is very competitive and winning may be considered to be the most important part of it (81). It is then suggested that this perspective transfers into everyday life and shapes the perspectives of the gamers (Beck et al. 81). But as was suggested with Yee’s examination of Star Wars Galaxies, it is also possible to see echoes of Adorno’s claims of free time conditioning one for work in the grander scheme of things as Beck and Wade consider (Adorno 190).

Returning to the new genre of the MMORPG and as well, the multi user dungeon (MUD), Kevin Moberly examines MMORPGs as well as MUDs, in an attempt to assess how these games win the consent of players in order to keep them not only interested in the game, but to remain providing economic capital and thus working for game providers (219). To begin this Moberly cites the MUD as a commodity and then uses Marx to consider the MUD’s value as a virtual reality (219). With this it is suggested that the players of the game must work to create the meaning of the game and cites Althusser to suggest that this production links a “shared imaginary relationship to the material condition of the game” (Moberly 220). Moberly suggests that this observation is characteristic of Adorno and Horkheimer’s culture industry in the sense that it conditions players into reproducing relations of production that are depended upon by the culture industry (220).

Considering Adorno and Assessing Aesthetic Value
After examining first technologies role in the merging of free time and work a move was made to consider both the content and experience of the user within the technology. However the perspective taken on this was one which considered the mode of production the key influence in affecting the boundaries between free time and work. What was intended to be argued here was not specifically a capitalist domination of free time, but an examination of the affects of capitalism on the technologies and cultural products that dominate our free time and the result of such an influence. What remains to be considered is the space for an analysis at the point of consumption. A reading of Walter Benjamin would lead one to consider the aesthetic value of these cultural products. In Alan How’s reading of Benjamin, Benjamin sees new forms of cultural expression, through mechanical reproduction as possibilities for sites of resistance, a move towards a world that is more democratic (77). This is due to the distracted state in which people observe movies in according to Benjamin (How 77). However Adorno would argue against Benjamin’s stance on mechanical reproduction by suggesting that the distracted state as a “symptom of regression” and attributed the distracted state to the notion that viewers were not living their own lives, but rather were subject to the will of companies (How 77).

Benjamin’s arguments highlight a key issue in the argument of free time merging with work, that being the perspective of analysis. The point at which the user consumes the media can not be ignored, yet in the same sense, an analysis of the nature of the content consumed can greatly benefit from theoretical frameworks that place criticism on the production of cultural products. In this essay a move to portray the values of Adorno’s critical approach to free time was made. As has been demonstrated here technology can read as subject to a capitalist economy, and as such, perpetuate Adorno’s claims on free time simply being labour for the capitalist system (Adorno 189-191). As well, when analyzing the content and experience, it was argued that the content was beginning to reflect the priorities of the capitalist system which produced the content intended to be consumed in ones free time (Adorno 190). Through the arguments made it is possible to see free time and work as remaining entangled, an entanglement which is perpetuated by the effects of a culture industry. However as noted earlier it is possible to take a different position on the notion of free time of work when assessing the point in which the content is consumed. This is even explored by Adorno in his essay on free time in which he considers the correlation between culture industry and free time, and notes that research has led him to question the effects of the culture industry on consciousness (195-197). Yet what remains from a consideration of free time and its relation to work is not only an understanding of the effects of a culture industry on our perception of free time and work, but an appreciation for the value of critical theory in allowing for such a conclusion to be realised.

Bibliography
Adorno, Theodor W. “Free Time”, The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture. Routledge, 2001. 187-197.

Beck, John C. and Mitchell Wade. Got game: how the gamer generation is reshaping business forever. Boston, Mass: Harvard Business School Press, 2004.

Bernstein, J.M. “Introduction to The Culture Industry,” The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture. Routledge, 2001. 98-106.

Campbell, J.E. and Carlson, M. “Panopticon.com Online Surveillance and the Commodification of Privacy.” Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46.4 (2002): 586-606.

Carlson, M. “Tapping into TiVo: Digital video recorders and the transition from schedules to surveillance in television.” New Media & Society 8.1 (2006): 97-115.

Chung, G. and Grimes, S.M. “Data mining the kids: Surveillance and market research strategies in children’s online games.” Canadian Journal of Communication 30.4 (2005): 527-548.

Cubitt, S. Simulation and Social Theory. Thousand Oaks, Cailfornia: SAGE Publications, 2001.

How, A. Critical Theory. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2003.

Moberly, Kevin “Reality for Sale: Role-playing, Ideology and multi-user Dungeons.” Capitalizing on Play: The Politics of Computer Gaming. Ed. Ken McAllister, And Ryan Moeller. Indiana, Pa: Indiana University of Pennsylvania, 2004. 217-230.

Siapera, E. “From couch potatoes to cybernauts? The expanding notion of the audience on TV channels’ websites.” New Media & Society 6.2 (2004): 155-172.

Yee, N. “The Labor of Fun: How Video Games Blur the Boundaries of Work and Play.” Games and Culture 1.1 (2006): 68-71.

All non scholarly references will be made in-line via hyperlinks. Scholarly references will be included in a references section at the end of the case study.

Understanding the “Internet Meme”

Introduction
What is a meme? What is meant by the term meme, or what does one even look like? To those savvy with specific communities of the internet, a meme is easily recognizable, but at this juncture two understandings will have to be made. The first is of the meme as the “internet meme”, that of the “inside joke” passed on through the web (Such as Dramatica’s definition I will outline later). The second is of the meme as coined by Richard Dawkins, which I will return to later. This distinction will allow for a more understandable analysis of the two concepts later on in the study. While the internet meme is a subject that could fill a book with a thorough analysis, I will attempt to assess the concept in a manner that provides a detailed outline of some of the key issues surrounding it. Essentially, this case study will boil down to an analysis of the legitimacy of the term meme as a descriptor for the notion of the “internet meme” and find that a better framework is needed for analysis of these cultural objects as merely placing the notion of the “internet meme” into current frameworks becomes problematic.

Being that this is a gaming culture website I will attempt to justify this essay beforehand. Often within gaming culture memes will become commonplace within gaming culture, and reside on gaming forums and other make way into other gaming locales. Because of this I feel that an analysis into “internet memes” is a justified one for this blog.

What Are Internet Memes?
Firstly, why the internet? While the memes in this case have a specific locale, the internet, that is not always the case as will be seen later. However I want to focus on the memes that have originated from specific cultures on the internet as to avoid branching out too far and causing confusion. So what is an internet meme? To begin to answer this I will first turn to a look at what I have found through my experience traversing web sites that carry an understanding of the “internet meme” in their culture

Before continuing I want to warn that the two websites I am going to mention are very not safe for work or “NSFW” as it is known. The websites are known for containing racism, sexism, pornography and many other forms of offensive material. Please only follow the links to these sites at your own risk. Any further “not safe for work” links will be tagged with (NSFW). Links to these sites will not be given unless specific reference is made to their content. The two sites I will speak of are known as 4chan.org, specifically the /b/ section. 4chan is an “image board” where users may post images and comments, which often results in the formation, propagation, and replication of internet memes. The /b/ section is the “Random” section of the website, which I have found to be the most referenced in my travels on the internet. In this section users may post random things to the site, which can often be offensive content, leading the board to have an adult’s only disclaimer prior to entering the site. The other site is Encyclopedia Dramatica (henceforth referred to as Dramatica) which according to Wikipedia is a wiki site that catalogs, among other things, the memes of 4chan and other sites.

I want to mention these sites for two reasons. One is that some may feel that these are the most important sites when discussing internet memes and that leaving the sites out of this case study would raise concerns from others. The second reason is to analyse their appropriation of the notion of the internet meme. The point of this will be to ultimately exemplify how the internet meme has forms and structures of distribution that are separate from the internet culture that surrounds it and as well, a culture surrounding memes. It has recently come to my attention after writing this that Greg Urban also wrote of “structures” in discussing cultural transmission, but the definition used by me here is separate from that of Urban’s and is only used to describe how I see the phenomenon working to the reader, rather than provide any concrete theory about it (Urban 31). Any other terms found in my consideration of the composition of an internet meme should also be considered as such.

Meme Culture
Some internet websites such as 4chan and Dramatica have specific language surrounding the use of memes. While I cannot for certain maintain the link between Dramatica and 4chan on the specific language used surrounding memes, I want to stress that this is not the important issue. The references to what language belongs to what website on Dramatica is ambiguous, it could be specifically the language of Dramatica or 4chan, as 4chan is often referenced (NSFW) in articles as one of, or the dominant site of meme production. However, Dramatica stresses that it is not an “extension of /b/” (NSFW). What can be gained from a look at this particular language is not only a first look into internet memes as defined by others, but an example of how the culture surrounding internet memes is separate of their form and structure of distribution when compared to other sites that make use of internet memes. In this case, the comparison will be made to Neogaf, a popular gaming forum on the internet.

Dramatica has a number of ways of talking about memes that would be useful for a breakdown of the basic notion of the internet meme however I cannot cover all of the language for obvious reasons. Dramatica defines a meme as (NSFW) a simple word for describing an internet phenomena or idea, an “inside joke” passed around the internet. Dramatica also defines the notions of old, forced memes and “in real life” memes, which will be looked at briefly. Dramatica notes an old meme (NSFW) as a meme that has been overused, noting these as “tired old jokes” that continue to spread through the net. Forced memes (NSFW) are ones that are intentionally started by someone for the purpose of the meme gaining popularity. Finally they note an “in real life” meme (NSFW) as one that exists socially among small groups, commonly referred to as “inside jokes” that aren’t passed through the web.

What can be seen from this language is that the Dramatica community has an understanding of memes that defines its role within the community, integrating internet memes into its culture. As Malin Sveningsson Elm notes “the internet has become more diversified” (3). What is meant by this is that online environments and the users of these online environments are “diverse and multifaceted” (Sveningsson Elm 5). She notes that the internet has became an “infinite” amount of differing subcultures which overlap each other (Sveningsson Elm 3). The significance of Svenginsson Elms point can further my argument that the language used by Dramatica is insufficient for analysis of internet memes. While as exemplified previously, the language does explain some basic concepts of internet memes, it fails to realise that the understanding of internet memes does not transgress its own specific community on the internet. Further understanding of this however would be best understood after an analysis of the composition of an internet meme.

"lolcats" are image based memes which form is known as a macro

The Composition of an Internet Meme
Internet memes take many different forms, they can be images, text, even video to name a few. These internet memes are essentially “ideas” to borrow a basic word from Dramatica for now (NSFW), which are either fabricated for the specific purpose of becoming a meme, referenced for the specific purpose of becoming a meme, or an “idea” simply catches on and spreads throughout an internet community (NSFW) and possibly finds its way to other internet communities. An internet meme is either incorporated into the culture of the community or discarded. The success of the meme on the community seems to be a deciding factor of whether or not it will move to other communities. Internet memes can succeed for a number of reasons, but humour seems to be the dominant reason for a memes success. Here is an instance where Dramatica states “old memes” as unfunny (NSFW), which I consider a testament to humours role in internet meme propagation. Success of an internet meme however, is based on the consensus of a community, whether it is stated or not. If there is no reason to propagate a meme, then it will not be propagated, the participation of others in the “inside joke” is an essential motivating factor in propagating a meme.

This participation is based on the structure of distribution of the internet meme, the community it is being propagated to or within, the toolset and skills of the participator, the form of the internet meme and the meaning of the internet meme. The structure of distribution of the internet meme may influence how an individual may go about participating within the replication, or propagation of a meme. For example a video of Rick Astley singing “Never Gonna Give You Up” can be propagated through the internet by tricking users into clicking on a link leading users to the video. Those who clicked on the link were under the assumption the link was to direct them elsewhere. This is called Rickrolling, which is seemingly done for humorous reasons. Rickrolling will be returned to often in this essay as it transgresses many borders I wish to cover.

Is Rick Astley a separate meme from Rickrolling?

It is here that I will begin to outline the notion of the internet meme as problematic, and would offer an attempt at moving toward a scholarly understanding of the notion of internet memes by pointing out scholarly notions found in semiotics/semiology and an examination of what the notion of metaculture can offer. However I will return to this after finishing my analysis of the composition of internet memes.

The cover of Wolverine #60

Thus an individual may participate in this meme by tricking others by linking them to the Rick Astley video. This can be done across many sites, and is not necessarily restricted to one website, as the meaning can be universal. Participation however is also based on the community it is being propagated to or within, as some communities do indeed share inside jokes, such as this example of the Neogaf.com forum using image editing tools to manipulate the cover of Wolverine #60. Members of the community found this particularly funny and ran with it, creating a meme that revolved around edited images. However if this internet meme, both its structure of distribution and form, are propagated to another community it may or may not catch on as intended. It is possible however if all the members find something particularly interesting about the image (such as finding it humorous) and decide to edit the image in the same vein as Neogaf.

As a side note to promote further understanding of the cultural conception of the internet meme, editing images has long been a ritual of many internet communities, such as Fark.com. Why is it now that some communities decide to denotate these as memes? Neogaf does. It would seem then that the community or individual might not need to recognize the phenomena of internet memes in order to participate in their propagation. Infact, as some memes even cross over to other mediums such as television or even “real life” how could one expect the viewers of the 2008 Macy’s Thanksgiving Day parade who got Rickrolled to even understand what a meme is. What if they don’t even use the internet? Does this mean the term of meme used by some communities is irrelevant? Unlikely, as Dramatica notes (NSFW) it is a simple connotation, but this further demonstrates that the term is a specific cultural understanding separate from the motions carried out by the internet meme

This edit of the original Wolverine #60 can be known as an "exploitable"

Limor Shifman notes as a new internet based humour type “maniphotos” which are humorous images which have been manipulated (Shifman 196-198). For Shifman, maniphotos are separate from just simply a funny photo and it must be clear that the photo has been maniupulated to be a maniphoto (Shifman 198). Shifman also notes the skill required to create maniphotos and further suggests that maniphotos became popular with the rise of tools such as Photoshop and as well, “much more humour oriented” (Shifman198). Editing images as I have noted requires specific software and skills. This could be a hindrance to the individual’s participation, or an improvement, as worse tools combined with a lack of skills are used (Such as MS Paint instead of Photoshop or GIMP) Impact on viewers and participators of the internet meme may go up or down. Similarly with better tools and skills, impact may go up or down. When noting this, I am referring to the humour I have experienced viewing a poorly edited image, and conversely a very well edited image. On this note, when discussing skills, some memes have a structure that allows individuals to produce “exploitables” (NSFW), as Dramatica would identify them, to aid others in the participation of the internet meme. Neogaf’s Wolverine internet meme original forum topic saw an individual create an image of just the head of “O face Wolverine” for easy editing onto other images. Further “exploitables” were made from this head as well, allowing individuals to be faster in creating edited images and require less skill to create those edits.

That is not to say tools and skills are a key factor in propagating internet memes, but an individuals tools and skills become crucial when considering the form of the meme in relation to the participation in the propagation of an internet meme by individuals. If many individuals in a community lack the skills to propagate an outside meme, such as Neogaf’s Wolverine “O face” if it were to ever leave Neogaf, it may not succeed as it did if it were say posted on a forum where individuals lacked the skills and tools to replicate and propagate it.

However, it should be considered if simply reposting images already created (as being done in this study) could be considered propagating a meme. I would argue that this is not propagation but replication, which could also become propagation when considering the structure and form of the internet meme. For example, if the first image of the Wolverine cover was simply posted and laughed at, it would not become a meme, until it has reached popularity and its structure has been defined. On Neogaf a common practice is to post images in response to an individuals posting that could be considered a response in itself. An example of this would be an image of a “shocked” individual in relation to a post that a user considered “shocking”.

The Wolverine #60 internet meme and Star Trek TNG internet meme merge on Neogaf

Thus the internet memes structure would become that of a response image and its form would be an image. As such, simply pasting an internet meme that has the form of an image in another community would have no meaning as an internet meme (unless it was specifically identified as an established internet meme) (NSFW) to the other community until they defined meaning for it, thus simply replicating an internet meme. Propagation here would be defined by success. The Rick Astley video is a simple replication where individuals are linked to a video. Participators send the video, and participators watch the video, it is only propagated when those who watched the video found meaning in the video and choose to send the video. In theory participators could just post the same image over and over, but this might quickly defeat the memes popularity among communities.

Some communities are even based around specific memes, such as Icanhascheezburger.com with “lolcats” which are images of cats edited into “macros” (NSFW) as displayed earlier in the study. Macros are simply images with words on them that convey meaning. In direct opposition to this however it is also possible for internet memes to merge into one such as this picture of Wolverines “O face” edited onto Jean Luc Picard’s face. Star Trek TNG is a common internet meme on Neogaf. However, what can be inferred then is that an internet meme is subject to the mental processes of those in the community, where it may be appropriated by an individual, and then negotiated through interaction with communities.

Memes and the Mental Process
What influences these mental processes? Why participate in the propagation of memes at all? To begin to answer this I want to look at the notion of commercial memes, ones that are propagated by larger corporations. For example, Dramatica notices the memes propagated through television commercials as “forced memes” (NSFW), and points out some old popular ones such as the Budweiser “Wassup” commercials. Dramatica also notices this as viral marketing. Mark Deuze, when talking about participation in relation to big media and the individual on the internet, noted a quote from the American Press Institute which argued that media companies need to “reimagine storytelling forms to vie for consumer attention… and they must react to the consumer’s creation of content with awe and respect” (67). This is in relation to a consideration of participatory news media by Dueze. He notes through Jenkins that this would create a “new participatory folk culture” for news media and allow individuals the tools to archive, annotate and the ones which I consider important to this argument at least, appropriate and recirculate content (Dueze 67). He follows by suggesting that this generates low cost content for companies as well as consumer loyalty (Dueze 67).

While Dueze may be referring to internet news when discussing these points I feel they refer to the notion of “internet memes” as viral tools of organizations as well, viral is a notion that will be returned to later as well with a discussion of Dawkins’ meme. For an example of the viral effect it is possible to see a new reference to the Wassup “forced meme” on Youtube with an updated version of the Wassup commercial (shown below) by 60Frames which is seemingly meant to promote Obama’s presidency. The video has over seventeen thousand comments and over six million views as of this posting. It is hard to tell however whether or not this has to do with the references made to the “old meme” as Dramatica would put it, or the controversial statements made within the imagery of the video. However it can be seen how the video uses old references or “memes” to tell its story. Thus “internet memes” can be appropriated and re-circulated in a “new participatory folk culture”. Those that stand to benefit from this sort of participation are those who “forced” this “meme” and those who would benefit from the meaning attached to the propagation of this internet meme, that being a positive one for Obama. Thus it can be inferred that someone stands to benefit from the production of an internet meme.

Another example of this is the production of the BBC Television show Doctor Who. Neil Perryman notes that within this show there was the phrase “Bad Wolf” which was used in every episode in some fashion (26). Perryman notes that Doctor Who fan sites were actively participating in discussions of the meme and even other media sources such as The Times was reporting on this (27). The two previous examples of Doctor Who and “Wassup” are examples of reasons individuals may find to participate in an internet meme. For those participating in the discussion of the “Wassup” meme, the draw to the old references may have lured them in to the message which would promote Obama, and possibly triggered discussion. For Doctor Who fans, the meme became an interest of the individuals as it was directly related to their interest in the Doctor Who television program. Having explained possibilities for an individuals reasoning for participation in internet meme propagation, a move to analysis of the theoretical understandings of this function is needed.

Memes and Signs
Author Matt Tomlinson outlines the notion of the meme of memetics fame. Through Blackmore, he notes that memes are “instructions for carrying out behaviour”, they are “selfish replicators” (Tomlinson 185). These replicators are like genes in that they “survive” with differing levels of success within differing environments (Tomlinson 185). He notes the more defined notion that Blackmore puts forward with the notion that “Memes are instructions for carrying out behaviour, stored in brains (or other objects) and passed on by imitation” (Tomlinson 186). A meme can be anything that can be reproduced or “replicated” between humans (Tomlinson 186). The transaction has led to the use of metaphors of the meme as parasitic or virus like in nature (Tomlinson 186). Tomlinson notes through Blackmore that the aim of memetics is to use the notion of genetics in understandings of social life (186). Tomlinson’s concern is raised by the notion of agency when he (in my opinion) rightfully notices the move of agency from human beings to the notion of the meme (Tomlinson 187).

He suggests that memes are supposedly interested (he notes, metaphorically) in their own survival (Tomlinson 187). This notion leads Blackmore to argue that the internet is merely a creation by memes and not humans to ensure the memes reproduction (Tomlinson 187). Tomlinson also points out the trouble with the concept of the meme. As he is analysing the spread of the meme “failed businessman” he wonders if it is really a meme, or if perhaps the notion of failure is a meme, and as well the notion of businessman (Tomlinson 189). He then questions if those two terms are indeed the meme and that the notion of failed businessman is a “memeplex”, an “agglomeration” of memes, an example of which, used by Blackmore and noted in Tomlinson, could be a political ideology (Tomlinson 189). Tomlinson then points out the notions that are inherent in the terms failure, businessman, and the notion one must understand when combining the two in regards to the specific Fiji case he is examining, that George Speight threw over the government in Fiji because he was a failed businessman (Tomlinson 190). This is an unstated association (Tomlinson 190). Thus he argues that memetics does not understand the specific cultural complexities that exist to give meaning to metaphor by analyzing the lack of success of the meme within Fiji itself to it’s success outside of Fiji (Tomlinson 190-191).

Tomlinson returns to his concern with memetics lack of agency and lack of place for innovation (191). He suggests that a successful theory of the “circulation of cultural products” needs to seriously consider notions of human agency as well as desire (192). With this, Tomlinson turns to Urban’s notion of metaculture. He suggests that metaculture is an understanding of the “cultural commentary” on the products (formerly memes) that move through cultural discourse (Tomlinson 192). Tomlinson suggests that it is cultural commentary because the commentary would be “informed” by culture (192). Tomlinson argues that metaculture is a “product” that comments on facets of culture and that this action moves notions through discursive space (192). With this he uses the example of positive film reviews helping ticket sales, and in turn affecting the way individuals incorporate that film catches on in public life (catchphrases etc) (Tomlinson 192). Things are deemed successful or not when compared with prior examples in relation to “cultural criteria” (193). It must also be evaluated, which would help circulate the “cultural product” commented on, circulate itself and also other related “forms of discourse” (193). With this he argues that success judgements are “fundamentally metacultural” (193).

Tomlinson makes a strong argument for the notion of metaculture in explaining the circulation of cultural products. I feel however that this may also be supplemented by the notions found in semiotics/semiology, as the notion of “internet memes” carry much information not only through individuals, but through products of those individuals as well. Take for example the Wolverine images on Neogaf. These images speak through the cultural understandings of the viewer. While comments may be made about the image which may very much influence the interpretation of the image, this possibility cannot always be assumed. Thus something must be said about how the cultural objects interact with our cultural understandings. I first want to look at an argument made by Erkki Kilpinen.

Kilpinen argues that the notion of the meme is an inferior notion to that of the sign from semiotics (215). He notes semiotics as a discipline that could unite the studies of both culture and nature (216). Through Thomas Sebeok, he points out that this is possible when understanding language or linguistics as being born of signs, and not the other way around (216). In further comparison to memes, Kilpinen argues that semiotics reached the notion of evolution in culture prior to memetics and he further notes that the human mind in semiotics can be seen as a “creation of signs” as opposed to memes as memetics would have it (224). It is also pointed out how Susan Langer discusses something similar to what was mentioned earlier in this study, where signs make the avenue for distribution of cultural objects (224).

The rules to "the game", of which you apparently just lost

My issue begins where Kilpinen points out that Saussure’s notion of signified does not have an equal to the general semiotics notion of “object” (225). He notes different languages words for “dog” as having equal conceptual content in Saussures notion, but suggests that general semiotics goes so far to relate the sign to an object, such as a the living dog, suggesting that the importance of this lies in the fact that the dog could possibly bite you but the concept can’t (225-226). Some internet memes such as “the game” (NSFW) do not refer to a specific object at all, but rather focus on individuals’ internal mechanisms, where the individual must remember not to think of the game, and when the game is thought of, they have lost the game. For perspective, Kilpinen then argues that reality is not a construction but its representations are (226).

While I do not want to get into a discussion of the notion of reality, I want to argue that these models (both memetics and semiotics) do not seem to point out the specific internet culture understanding of what an internet meme is or how internet memes function. For example they do not define the “structures of distribution” that I have pointed out. However, the terms in semiotics/semiology may still be useful in analysis of the “signs” “internet memes” produce. Thus an internet meme may be understood differently through different cultures as noted earlier and the notion of an internet meme itself, that is its structure of distribution and form I described is a specific cultural understanding.

Conclusion
To conclude I want to look at the work of Alex Walter. He argues that memes are not like genes because they “do not create their own means of replication and so there is nothing for a virus to hijack” (Walter 17). He notes that “memes are dependant on representation content” (4). This representational content is referring to ideas and suggests that when ideas are of a possibly “transmissible nature”, those ideas are memes (4). With this it is possible to see that there are avenues where memetics meets eye to eye with the notion of internet memes, thus providing insight as to why the metaphor was used for the notion of internet memes. But there are flaws in memetics that relate to the notion of the internet memes. Walter points out that Dan Sperber objected to the replication thesis of memetics saying representations between individuals are not identical, and identical memes are required for replication that is similar to identical gene replication (6). Certainly this notion could be true for memes such as the Rickroll, but what of ones such as “the game”, or Neogaf’s “Wolverine”?

To conclude he suggests that disciplines should use the appropriate “toolboxes” for the appropriate tasks and I believe this to be true (18). I would argue that consideration needs to be made of internet memes further than applying the old traditional tools. Is the term “meme” useless? Not at all, for specific cultural groups it holds meaning to a process which is understood and sought to be defined for those specific cultural groups. For those wishing to delve deeper into the notion of the internet meme, I hope this study has shown that a specific “toolkit”, to borrow Walters word, will need to be composed.

Scholarly References
Deuze, Mark. “Participation, Remediation, Bricolage: Considering Principal Components of a Digital Culture.” The Information Society 22 (2006): 63-75.

Kilpinen, Erkki. “Memes versus signs: On the use of meaning concepts about nature and culture.” Semiotica 171.1-4 (2008): 215-237.

Perryman, Neil. “Doctor Who and the Convergence of Media.” Convergence: The Internation Journal of Research Into New Media Technologies 14.1 (2008): 21-39.

Shifman, Limor. “Humor in the Age of Digital Reproduction: Continuity and Change in Internet-Based Comic Texts.” International Journal of Communication 1 (2007): 187-209.

Sveningsson Elm, Malin. “Understanding and Studying Internet Culture(s): Hybridity and Interdisciplinarity.” NORDICOM Review 29.2 (2008): 85-90.

Tomlinson, Matt. “Memes and Metaculture: The Politics of Discourse Circulation in Fiji.” The Australian Journal of Anthropology 15.2 (2004): 185-197.

Walter, Alex “The trouble with memes: deconstructing Dawkins’s monster.” Social Science Information 46.4 (2007): 691-709.

While I normally post stuff to watch on back seat gaming this will be one of the first documentaries that will be featured on the site.

The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters is a documentary about a rivalry between Billy Mitchell, reigning champion of the Donkey Kong arcade cabinet as well as restaurant chain owner and newcomer Steve Wiebe, junior high school teacher.

The documentary essentially follows the lives of both contenders as Wiebe is shown as having moved from obsession to obsession until settling on Donkey Kong, where he becomes engrossed in mastering the game and hoping to eventually beat Billy’s high score. Billy is portrayed as a the cocky high score holder and seemingly antagonized in the film.

The film is an interesting look into one sub culture of competitive arcade cabinet video game playing, as it documents the politics of competitive video gaming, and how Steve Wiebe faces off against them. Click read the rest to see the trailer for the film.

References: Wikipedia: Billy Mitchell (gamer), Wikipedia: The King of Kong: A Fistful of Quarters, Wikipedia: Steve Wiebe