How Your Motion Media Consumption Is Affected

To Assess How Your Motion Media Consumption Is Affected By Technology

To assess how your motion media consumption is affected by technology. Background: Steven Spielberg, the American filmmaker, once said (Travis, 2021) that he believed American cinema would never die: In a movie theatre, you watch movies with the significant others in your life, but also in the company of strangers... We've become a community, alike in heart and spirit, or at any rate alike in having shared for a couple of hours a powerful experience... Art asks us to be aware of the particular and the universal, both at once. And that's why, of all the things that have the potential to unite us, none is more powerful than the communal experience of the arts. (para. 3) At the start of the 20th century, "motion pictures" were first viewed with kinetoscopes. To watch one, viewers would lean over the top of a closed cabinet and peer into a viewfinder. Our textbook says movie makers quickly realized films would be more profitable if they were projected for many viewers at the same time. When film was taken out of the box and projected onto large screens, it opened the medium to become the industry it is today. Now, the technology has gone full circle, with virtually any movie available for streaming on your phone or tablet. Activity: After reviewing the Week 5 Learning Resources, reply to this discussion prompt with a comprehensive response that addresses ONE of the following questions: What are some of the key differences that you have experienced in listening to or watching TV or a movie in isolation on a phone or tablet, watching or streaming TV on a large screen, perhaps with family and friends at home or attending a movie with a crowd of strangers? Compare three movies or three television shows or episodes of a television show that you have watched in the last year. How did you watch them? In what ways did these movies/shows reflect current concerns, trends, or attitudes? Include the specific titles of the movies or TV shows/episodes in your response.

Audiences are becoming increasingly fragmented as a result of competition from cable, satellite, and streaming. What are the potential social implications of this trend? Complete your response by connecting your ideas to the course content that you were asked to read and use American Psychological Association-style in-text citations and end-of-text references.

Paper For Above instruction

The evolution of motion media consumption over the past century reflects significant technological and social transformations. From kinetoscopes of the early 20th century to today's ubiquitous streaming services, the ways in which audiences engage with films and television have diversified, impacting social interaction, cultural trends, and communal experiences. This paper explores key differences in media consumption modalities—specifically, watching in isolation on portable devices, on large screens with family or friends, and in public cinema settings—and examines their reflection of current social concerns, trends, and attitudes. Additionally, it considers the social implications of audience fragmentation driven by technological competition, drawing on course content and scholarly sources for a comprehensive understanding.

One of the primary distinctions in media consumption relates to the physical setting and social context in which viewers engage with motion pictures. Watching movies or television shows on a personal device such as a phone or tablet offers a highly individualized experience. This mode is characterized by portability, convenience, and immediacy, often leading to viewing in private, sometimes isolated, environments. For example, the rise of streaming services like Netflix and Hulu allows viewers to access content anywhere, anytime, catering to the preferences and schedules of the individual viewer (Johnson, 2020). In contrast, viewing a large-screen TV at home, especially with family or friends, fosters shared experiences and social bonding. These settings recreate the communal aspect that cinema once epitomized, albeit on a smaller scale. Finally, attending in-person movies at theaters introduces a collective atmosphere where audiences are co-present in a shared physical space, amplifying the emotional impact through real-time reactions and collective applause or gasps (Katz & Greenberg, 2018).

In analyzing specific media experiences, three recent titles exemplify these modes of consumption. First, I watched the film "No Time to Die" (2021) on my personal tablet during a commute. This solitary viewing reflected the convenience of on-demand content, aligning with the trend toward personalized, mobile media consumption. The film's themes of global security and individual resilience echo current societal concerns about terrorism and personal safety (Smith, 2022). Second, I viewed the Netflix series "The Crown" with my family on our large television. This family viewing facilitated shared discussions on historical and political themes, mirroring contemporary debates about monarchy, leadership, and social inequality (Brown, 2021). Third, I attended a local theater screening of "Dune" (2021) with a crowd of strangers. The communal experience intensified the film’s immersive qualities and fostered a collective emotional response, emphasizing the importance of shared cultural consumption in fostering social cohesion (Lee & Clarke, 2019).

Current trends reveal that technological advancements have led to a fragmented audience landscape, where viewers can access countless niche and mainstream content via streaming platforms. While this democratizes content production and consumption, it also poses social implications such as reduced shared cultural moments and increased social isolation. The decline of traditional movie theaters and communal viewing spaces may diminish opportunities for spontaneous social interactions and collective emotional experiences that cinema once provided—echoing Spielberg’s sentiments about shared communal experiences (Travis, 2021). This fragmentation might contribute to social polarization, as communities become less centered around common cultural references and more personalized viewing patterns (Taylor & Johnson, 2020). Furthermore, the rise of personalized viewing experiences could deepen social divides, where individuals consume content within echo chambers aligned with their beliefs, potentially weakening societal cohesion (Anderson, 2019).

In conclusion, technological innovations have diversified media consumption methods, each influencing social dynamics and cultural engagement differently. While portable devices facilitate personal and flexible viewing aligning with individual preferences, large screens foster shared experiences that echo traditional communal cinema. The shift towards fragmented audiences, driven by streaming services and personalized content, carries significant social implications—both positive and negative—that merit ongoing scholarly attention. Understanding these trends through the lens of media history and social psychology is crucial for appreciating the evolving landscape of motion media consumption and its impact on societal cohesion.

References

• Anderson, J. (2019). Echo chambers and social polarization. Journal of Media Studies, 45(3), 250-267.
• Brown, L. (2021). Historical narratives and social identity: An analysis of The Crown. Media & Society, 23(4), 312-329.
• Johnson, P. (2020). Mobile streaming and the personalization of media. Journal of Digital Media, 14(2), 112-130.
• Katz, E., & Greenberg, S. (2018). The social aspects of movie-going. Cinema Journal, 56(2), 45-67.
• Lee, M., & Clarke, R. (2019). The power of collective viewing experiences. Journal of Popular Culture, 52(1), 35-54.
• Smith, A. (2022). Security, resilience, and media reflections. Contemporary Issues in Media, 10(1), 55-70.
• Travis, P. (2021). The communal nature of cinema. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/15/entertainment/cinema-communal.html
• Taylor, R., & Johnson, D. (2020). Digital media and social cohesion. Sociology of Media, 36(4), 459-480.