Media changes ‘alarmingly protectionist’. 14/07/2006. ABC News Online
In answer to the first question about the media changes. This story in The Age: Meet the always-on generation, could explain why the media changes mentioned above are probably irrelevant.
It always frustrates and saddens me to see articles such as this speak of how a “generation” relates to technology. Has nobody noticed that many young folks are from families too poor to afford such toys and gadgets? Are they not part of this “generation”? But commentary about youth and technology is overwhelmingly market-driven. And the poor are invisible to marketers for the most mundane of reasons – lacking money they are not part of the “market” except in the most limited sense. Of course, these folks are free to focus on the segment of youth that is relevant to their concerns. But what irks me is the arrogance by which they label their chosen segment as though it were the whole. When will see studies or commentary on youth who live in homes without cable TV, or who have no cellphone – or who have a “minutes” (i.e. non-contract) phone – but almost never have any minutes. Or, who have internet access while in school, but then graduate or drop out and work at a low wage job with no computer perks. Who is the new generation really, eh?
-Steve