Jump to content

Talk:Digital media/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

POV check

Why does it open with the words "Digital disaster"? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lesley Fairbairn (talk • contribs) 17:14, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

IMHO, there is plenty of bias in this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.207.180.66 (talk) 15:00, 30 April 2005

The POV check notice was posted almost 3 months ago, and despite several edits, no major changes have been made, nor has anyone else commented on the talk page about POV problems. As such, if no one objects, I will take down the POV check. --K. AKA Konrad West TALK 23:51, 25 July 2005 (UTC)
It strikes me that the bulk of content of this article is entirely seperate from the technical issue of what digital media is. It's clearly not NPOV; use of the term 'draconian', implication of intentional criminalization both are used to attack the record industry without the counter-arguement over intellectual property and copyright. However, I'd suggest the rights and wrongs of digital media are of a scope and focus more suited to an alternate article, not one on the definition of digital media. It's entirely possible no-one has cared enough to suggest an NPOV edit or had a reason to add to this talk page - that doesn't mean it's not biased. Also, I'd suggest people using the wikipedia - an online open source information resource - probably aren't too upset by a POV that slants in this way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.137.76.219 (talk) 18:16, 18 August 2005

Proposed merger with New media

Do not merge. “Digital media” is a technical concept, a hypernym of computer data storage. I found this article searching an interwiki to ru:Носитель информации (literally a medium of information). But “New media” is something deeply socio-cultural. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

In media theory digital media can also refer to media which are simply discrete. E.g. the alphabet is a type of digital media because it consists of discrete characters. The printing press/moveable type can also be considered digital in this sense. Even 8mm cinema is digital as while the representation of the film is analog (continuous) it physically is a series of discrete images. However, I think that there should be made a distinction between digital/bits media and other digital media as those I have mentioned above. A good reference for this distinction is Lev Manovich's Language of New Media Khawaga (talk) 06:33, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

hghdighepagheagqer they would be there!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.109.209.60 (talk) 18:29, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Disambiguation Needed

I've been researching "Paid Digital Media" as it relates to Digital (Online) Marketing. This is the case of the same words being used (Digital Media) with a wildly differing usage definition than this current article. I don't dispute that binary bits can be used to describe a basic (and very technical) foundation of digital media, but there are additional, big picture, definitions that now exist. CaseyChesh (talk) 16:08, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Digital media vs digital content

This article is mixing digital media (communication) with digital content (media). I'm removing the section on art for this reason. Oicumayberight (talk) 19:49, 6 July 2013 (UTC)

Yagive Digital Media

Yagive Digital Media provides Web development, E-Brochures, Newsletters, Email marketing, Graphic Designing, Photography, Printing in coimbatore and around tamilnadu -india . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yagive (talk • contribs) 12:34, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Digital media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:56, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Digital media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:45, 5 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Digital media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:00, 29 December 2017 (UTC)

Comment

What are the negative effects of digital media on the youth of today's world? How does the rise of digital media define the world we live in today, and affect the potential outcomes of upcoming political elections? Does it negatively effect democracy? I believe these questions are relevant to the article itself. In terms of my feedback on the article, I feel like this article is unbiased and seems to consist of a variety of resources, which allows for the reader to take away from it what they seek. Including this, the article seems to do a deep dive on the history of digital media, including the core of digital media which is coding. Though I agree it is relevant, I feel as though it is not necessarily what most readers are looking for in terms of knowledge.Ishangill10 (talk) 06:54, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Sub Sections Birenn (talk) 17:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)birenn

Sub sections in this article about more SVOD, smartphone media, impact of those would make the article perhaps bette ? Birenn (talk) 17:18, 12 February 2020 (UTC)birenn

My very ugly parse tree

Here's my lame attempt to restructure one of the (few) current lead sentences as a parse tree:

The media used may include:

  • digital equivalent of film techniques
  • stills
  • audio only
  • any of the other forms of non-physical media:
    • material that exists only as electronic files as opposed to:
      • actual paintings or photographs on:
        • paper
        • sounds stored on tape or disc
        • movies stored on film
    • which individuals can use to tell a story or present an idea.

I'm not even sure I got that entirely right. Where precisely does which bind in this messy tangle of massively deferred grammatical gratification? — MaxEnt 18:51, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Please update this article

I suggest adding more pictures and modern-day examples of digital media and their applications. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Foxesarefun (talk • contribs) 02:00, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

Some Suggestions to Make This Article Better

Hello, my name is Dalton DeLima, I am a university student learning to edit, and I am leaving suggestions on ways you can make this article better. First, I looked at seven of your sources at random and found that most of the sources linked to the beginning of the article were well written, non-biased, and credible. However, when I got to sources near the end of the article, the sources appeared to go down in quality and the biases were apparent.

One example of a strong source was Source 2: Streaming and Digital Media: Understanding the Business and Technology by Dan Rayburn. This book is clearly catalogued and is well written with no biases. On the other side, I have unfortunately found plagiarism regarding source 74. The entire section from “What is a Digital Magazine?” to the source 74 marker is a direct quote taken from the article without any type of paraphrasing. This is against Wikipedia standards and should be corrected.

There are also pieces of information and claims that do not have sources attributed to them. I will leave some suggestions to sources where I see they may fit.

The entire introduction paragraph for the History section has no citations but there are claims present.

Citation for Charles Babbage: Who Was Charles Babbage?.

Citation for Ada Lovelace: Ten Things You May Not Know About Ada Lovelace.

There is another spot where a citation is needed, and this is regarding a Citizen Journalism claim.

Citizen Journalism citation: The 11 Layers of Citizen Journalism

Your section on YouTube creators needed a couple of citations.

These articles may work for you: The Most Popular YouTube Channels and The Highest Paid YouTubers

Overall, this article is fairly well written but offers much room for improvement. Work on some of these changes, take away the plagiarized information in the last section, and add these citations and I think this article will be on its way to being a good article. --Ddelima895 (talk) 22:52, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Peer Review of the New Contribution

Organization 1: Article is well organized and clean. No issues. Balance 1: Everything relates to a center theme, which being TikToks copyright issues. 2: The contributor presents multiple viewpoints, including a POC, but maybe needs more. 3: The contributor doesn’t try to convince the reader of a particular side or draw conclusions. Neutrality 1: There is no biased language. 2: No claims on unnamed groups 3: The contribution is mostly about TikToks shortcomings, but the contributor offers a rebuttal info into what TikTok is doing in terms of copyright. Reliability 1: 1st source is New York Times which fits Wikipedia’s guidelines. The 2nd source is a blog that while well informed, the author holds a bias. The 3rd is an online law firm which wrote a good article. The 4th is legal news website/ law journal which is fine. 2: Statements are attributed to a variety of different sources and doesn’t lean into a single point of view. 3: There are no unsourced statements. Atringale19 (talk) 00:17, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I have come up with a new paragraph for the Copyright section of the article that I feel may be a good addition.

One digital media app that has been known to have copyright concerns is the short video sharing app TikTok. TikTok is a social media app that allows its users to share short videos up to one minute in length, using a variety of visual effects and audio.[1] According to Loyola University’s Chicago School of Law, of the music used on the platform, somewhere in the realm of 50% is music that is unlicensed.[2] TikTok does have several music licensing agreements with various artists and labels, creating a library of fair and legal use music.[3] However, this does not cover all bases for its users. A user could still commit a copyright violation for example by accidentally having music playing on a stereo in the background, or by recording a laptop screen playing a song.[4] --Ddelima895 (talk) 17:20, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I have also added to the copyright section and I reworded a few areas. I add information on the DMCA and online piracy and fair use. RoboElephant (talk) 21:00, 21 November 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Herrman, John. "How TikTok Is Rewriting The World". nytimes.com. The New York Times. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
  2. ^ Bayley, Lydia. "TikTok: A Copyright Time Bomb". luc.edu. Loyola University's Chicago School of Law. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
  3. ^ Gardoce, Rowan. "The Legal Side Of TikTok: Music, Copyright and Ownership". sprintlaw.com.au. Sprint Law. Retrieved 17 October 2021.
  4. ^ Gleason, Ann Potter. "Copyright Owners' Love/Hate Relationship With TikTok and Instagram Raises Legal Issues". natlawreview.com. National Law Review. Retrieved 17 October 2021.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 13 January 2020 and 27 April 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Birenn.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:31, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 23 August 2021 and 13 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): RoboElephant.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 2 September 2021 and 9 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Ddelima895.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 20:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Blog

Discussion 174.253.194.183 (talk) 02:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Digital_media/Archive_1&oldid=1139820478"