1. The law that I agree with the most would be Sarnoff's
Law, which deals with media networks. Sarnoff's law states that the value of a
broadcast network increases linearly with the number of people within it,
meaning that the value of a network is proportional to the number of viewers it
has.
I believe this is true in many cases if not all media networks.
Most media networks are built off of the concept of "views" or
"likes." These "views" or "likes" represent the
amount of people who are interested in the content that a particular network
displays. Views/likes represent how many people actually take the time to stop
and look at the content on a network, which ultimately shows how valuable a
media network is. A prime example of Sarnoff's Law would be Youtube. Youtube is
a website based primarily off of "views." On Youtube people post
videos in hopes to achieve as many views as possible. These views are a sort of
currency for users. The more views that a video has the more valuable it
becomes. Advertisers will see that a video has potential and realizes that it
will become very popular. So they will pay the users to put an ad in front of
their video so that their ad can reach potential viewers. As the amount of
views increases the value of the video increases as well.
2. I think that people will get
information five years from now the same way that people get their information
now, which is through several different media outlets. The only thing that I
think will change from now and five years from now is the speed that we can get
information. I think that media networks will continue to increase as times
goes on, increasing the speed at which people can receive information. This
could result in world domination so we must be careful!!!
What you said in your second question is so true about the speed in which we will receive information. It's crazy because we already can access information so quickly now but with new technological advances who knows how much quicker we'll be able to find what we want to know when we want to know it. I worry about privacy now, I can't imagine what it'll be like in the next five years!
ReplyDeleteI would agree with the first part of your response. I think that a "like", though easy and simple, means a lot more than just a brief, excited spark of interest. For me to like something means I'm generally very interested in it and continue to keep up with content from whatever it is I'm liking. I think before with the Dot Com bubble this law wasn't ready to apply because the technology was slacking behind the potential of the idea of the internet. Now that we understand advertising online, converting an audience into customers is easy.
ReplyDeleteI would agree with the first part of your response. I think that a "like", though easy and simple, means a lot more than just a brief, excited spark of interest. For me to like something means I'm generally very interested in it and continue to keep up with content from whatever it is I'm liking. I think before with the Dot Com bubble this law wasn't ready to apply because the technology was slacking behind the potential of the idea of the internet. Now that we understand advertising online, converting an audience into customers is easy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the importance you've mentioned that likes and views have in representing the opinions and values of those who are taking in the content. The amount of people that take in a certain piece of information on a social media platform carries incredible amounts of weight with regards to potential money involved (YouTube). Within the last 5-10 years the amount of YouTube stars that are now rich and famous just by viewership they deliver has grown tremendously. That shows the possibilities that are out there for people who generate content that attracts mass amounts of "views" as well as showcasing the importance of what the "like" or "view" actually means.
ReplyDelete