This blog post is going to be a lot shorter than the previous ones, primary because I don't know much about this week's topic, hate this week's topic, and personally don't enjoy talking about this week's topic. If I don't post anything though I'll get a zero, and that is just unacceptable.
Anyway...
Topic I: Newspapers
1) I live in a small town where jack-all happens. If anything does happen you'll usually hear about it through either word of mouth, or you'll be there to see it first hand. I've done both. One time I watch a guy who took a baseball bat to someone in the library get arrested downtown (the library is right next to both the Sheriff's office and police department building). Another time I heard from a friend of mine that someone in a neighboring town literally blew up his house with an errant cigarette. Local news plays little in my daily life (partially because so little happens), and I know those two stories are true because I was there for the first one and saw the aftermath of the second.
2) No I don't subscribe to any online newspapers. I simply have no interest in having one, nor the money to sustain one if I wanted to.
3) I'm probably a three, maybe a three point five. I'm a bit more informed in some areas than in others. I can tell you which month Wreck-it-Ralph 2 comes out (November; which reminds me, I need to see the first one), but I could not tell what Congress decided not to agree on last time they were in session.
Topic II: Fake News
As if the last topic was not one I hated enough...
1) No I don't agree with the mutated cheeto man when he claims certain stories are fake. Primarily because 1, he's too consistent with which stories or news groups he calls that (you never hear him talk about Fox News the way he talks about CNN or the NY Times, so he's very clearly picking on whoever is not stroking his ego); and 2, most of the stories he claims are "fake" are things that, if proven true, could get him in serious trouble. Unless your in an action movie trying to hunt down the real perpetrator, the innocent usually don't vehemently deny things in such a way that makes them look even more guilty.
2) Yes, yes he is; or he's at least trying to, whether or not he's actually succeeding depends on who you ask.
3) I can't. I don't know enough and that is one rabbit hole I refuse to go down. It's pretty much a cavalcade of yelling and nonsense to me. I will say though that this whole mess has caused a lot of Americans to start double checking where their information is coming from, so that might end up being a good thing.
Note
I cannot help but find it ironic that I hate discussing real world journalism and news when a few characters (one of them a main character) I've come up with are journalists themselves (albeit more along the lines of The Daily Show's correspondents than CNN's).
Topic I: 1st Amendment, Copyright, Freedom of Expression
1) In case the following post does not make it clear I did not watch the entirety of "RiP! A Remix Manifesto". I simply do not have the time or attention span to watch someone go on about copyright and freedom of expression for an hour and a half.
That being said I did gather the whole idea of "remix culture" fairly easily since I have grown up in it. I've listened to remixed songs on occasion and I mentioned in an earlier blog am an unabashed reader of fanfiction, which is pretty much a remix of a preexisting work. The idea that "culture always builds on the past" was also an idea that was able to hold my attention before the documentary bored me into a coma. When I am writing I often rely on old stories and myths to create environments or creatures; so I am relying on past stories to write newer ones. Adaptations of books and plays from history probably count as remix culture as well, Romeo + Juliet, Baz Luhrmann's modern day adaption of Shakespeare's second most known play is probably a good example*.
2)I cannot speak for any other person's creative process, only my own. I will admit that my first attempts at writing were pretty much bad overt or thinly veiled fanfiction. The only thing is that I did not publish/post them online no... I wrote them in elementary school and once or twice had to read them out loud to the teacher and my classmates. Now fortunately, I was to naive to be embarrassed about it and the only people who really cared were my mum and teacher who then promptly forced me to try to be more creative and original after.
Now as someone who has read fanfiction or listened to audio plays based on and audiobooks of fanfiction I can safely say that there are a lot of creative people out there who channel that creativity through it or fan art. The legality of fan works is something of a grey area since the fanfiction writers or artists are almost never doing this for profit, unlike actual digital pirates, but the problem of course is that they are still using copyrighted material. Although as this video shows fanfiction and remix culture has possibly been around for centuries, but once copyright became a thing it became a lot more complicated. I personally would not mind fan works of my original creative works if they ever get published or made; and to be fair most creative artists for shows and movies don't seem to mind either. And I don't get why they would, it is effectively free advertising.
3) As someone who is partially intentionally blind to the world outside my own circle I cannot think of any events where someone when "too far" in exercising freedom of speech or the press. I would point to the Charlottesville Neo-Nazi's but that's a can of worms that I'm not really in the mood to open.
4) In relation to the above, I would have had them all imprisoned for hate speech and encouraging it (or shot for treason since they were explicitly evoking both Nazi Germany (a hostile power) and the Confederacy (literal traitors who killed U.S. soldiers and citizens)).
Topic II: WikiLeaks
If I say "screw this, I'm outta here" would I loose points?
...
Probably... ugh...
1) I've always found the less I know about WikiLeaks the better. That said, when I do hear about them I've generally gotten them impression that they can be rather irresponsible.
2) They generally don't seem to think through what the leak to the public. Different pieces of information can have different ramifications depending on where they come from and what they relate to.
3) WikiLeaks is pretty much doing what whistleblowers did in the early twentieth century when they revealed what was going on in the meet packing industry. That being said, I feel like there is a bit of a difference when leaking documents from businesses and corporations and leaking government information, which is often classified for very good reasons. Although even still, leaking stuff from the government is also something of a grey area since sometimes something that was supposed to be targeted at potential threats can spill into non-threats.
4) When it comes to the current state of free speech, freedom of information and freedom of expression/creativity, I see no reason to be immediately alarmed. Most people can still say whatever they want, they're more likely to get flak from other people than the government for it. If the White House leaks are any indication, government transparency (at least for the executive) is probably not a problem. Lastly, most creative artists and content creators are rather friendly towards their fandoms who remix their copyrighted characters and works through fanfiction for fan art, probably because (again) they get free advertising.
Although my intentional limiting of my understanding of topics like this makes me rather narrow minded here.
5) Didn't I just do that above? But here's an example of remix culture at work (two ways!) for you anyway.
There was no fucking way I was doing this project on advertising. Television though I can handle, the problem was that I'm not really watching a lot of television right now (I'm doing a lot of reading though) and what I am watching I don't think would work for this project. I am sure there is someone out there with a better brain who could make this assignment on Trollhunters or My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, (two of the shows I currently watch with regularity) but I am not one of them.
Fortunately, there is one show I watch that does work, so welcome back to this class blog:
Date Time and Network: Despite its otherwise insane airing schedule new episodes of the show consistently air at 7:30 pm (Pacific Time, it might change for other time zones) on Cartoon Network. Days are harder to pin down because of the shows draconian airing schedule I outlined in a previous blog. Personally I record the show on DVR and watch it after it has recorded.
Episode Watched: I watched the most recent episode "Reunited". A basic rundown of the episodes story is that a wedding between two of the show's central characters is interrupted by the arrival of the series main antagonists. The main cast of Steven (Zach Callison), Garnet (Estelle) and her components Ruby (Charlyne Yi) and Sapphire (Erica Luttrel), Pearl (Deedee Magno Hall) and Amethyst (Michaela Dietz) are all present for the episode as are supporting cast members Greg (Steven's father voiced by Tom Scharpling), Connie (Grace Rolek), Lapis Lazuli (Jennifer Paz) and Paridot (Shelby Rabara). The episode also guest stars Uzo Aduba (Orange is the New Black) as Bismuth, Lisa Hannigan as Blue Diamond and Patti LuPone (any number of stage musicals) as Yellow Diamond.
I personally don't think any of the cast is typecast, but then again, I am probably the wrong person to be asked that question.
Research: Steven Universe first started airing in November of 2013. It was created by Rebecca Sugar who is both the first woman and first non-binary person (though she did not come out as such until recently) to create a show for Cartoon Network. Sugar first worked as a storyboard artist for Adventure Time before departing to work full time on Steven Universe. One of the shows story board artists, Ian Jones-Quartey, is the grandson of the designer of the Flag of Ghana and based one of the shows characters on her. Since its release (and especially as it has progressed) the show has enjoyed success and a cult following.
I need to move on but more in formation about the show and its creator can be found in this radio interview.
ADs: I skip them, so I'm not covering them.
Analyze
Attitude/Style: While it is technically set on an Earth with an alternate timeline (the Delmarva peninsula is a full on state here), it is other wise set in the modern day. The characters use modern speech patterns and dress in modern clothing. The show is animated which means they literally have no limits on where things can happen since they don't have to build expensive sets. Now I'm better at analyzing story and characters them filming techniques because I am a writer, so I'm going to have to skip describing the editing and that stuff because I'll have little to no idea what I am talking about.
Similarities: The one main similarity I can find worth mentioning here is that the show is more serialized that it was when it started, which is something a lot of shows have been doing or experimenting with of late. Trollhunters for example has an overarching story line for it's first thirteen episodes, and every Stevenbomb is effectively a serial as all five episodes tend to cover an overarching story.
Differences: A major difference the show has is that, despite having a male main character, there is still a large female presence in the main cast. In fact Steven is the only male main character (on a nominal level, Gems technically have no gender but project female forms and have female voices). Not to mention said male main character, while still the Hero, does not do much of the traditional hero things: he is not the leader (that's Garnet), and he does not do much sword swinging (usually but that's a whole other story). Instead he has more traditionally feminine powers, particularly healing, is a pacifist (until he's got no choice) and is rather emotional.
Further, the show takes advantage of the fact that Gems technically have no gender but appear female to discuss LGBTQ related themes; in fact that wedding mentioned above is between Ruby and Sapphire; it is presumably the first on screen same-sex marriage in an animated series aimed at children.
Interpret
Why can't I just have someone smarter and more qualified do this? Fine...
Stereotypes: There aren't really any. Steven (as outlined above) is anything but your usual sci-fi or fantasy hero character, Ruby and Sapphire's relationship has bumps in it (but so does every relationship) but is otherwise perfectly happy, Pearl is something of a neurotic perfectionist with a complicated relationship with almost everyone, Amethyst is laid back and more relaxed and no supporting characters rely on stereotypes for there character. They are all characters; as a writer I can say with confidence that a stereotype is not a character. Even some of what would be considered "stereotypes" are used advantageously. Connie, who is of (India) Indian descent, has somewhat controlling parents, but one of her major character arcs is resisting them and telling them it is unnecessary.
Demographics: While the show is perfectly okay for children, it seems to be aimed at families for the most part. Family is actually a major theme in the series since Steven is a Gem/human hybrid and thus has two families, even if his human family only accounts for his father Greg. Again I don't watch the commercials, but the glimpses I do get are pretty much the ads Cartoon Network always runs, toys and products aimed mostly at children.
I cannot say exactly what kind of cultural picture of the U.S. I would paint if I were a visitor from another country. It would probably be rather jarring compared to the news about the U.S. that circles the globe these days.
Evaluate
Strengths and Weaknesses: This article can go into the shows strengths better than I can:
I've already gone into detail about the shows insane airing schedule, but as this article explains there is method to the madness; in short, it is because of modern viewing habits like binge watching.
It's one potential weakness that I can see is a common weakness in children's television and movies that I see all the time. It can sometimes struggle to simplify a much more complicated subject. Now to be fair it does a better job of it because of clever writing, especially in regards to Gem fusion and its metaphors for everything revolving around relationships and sex, but for other topics like the rebellion that took place in the shows backstory it can be hard to compromise between an inherently complicated subject (rebellions usually are) and simplifying it for children. Although to get around that, the show focus on the simpler emotional causes and results as opposed to the complicated political ones.
What do I like about the show? Simple. I like it's story and writing (the latter is best exemplified hereWARNING: THERE BE MAJOR SPOILERS THERE), I like it's characters and the way they bounce off each other, and I love it's art style. It is one of the most unique looking shows out there right now.
Me vs. the Critics: There is a slight problem for this area. Most of the "critical" reviews of the show come from Gizmodo or the A.V. Club, which I'm not 100% sure counts as "professional". The likely explanation for this is that animation (be it TV or film) does not get much respect in the art world so more "important" critics probably ignore them. At any rate, the guys and gals from Gizmodo and the A.V. Club seem to be in agreement that that shows strengths are its writing, characters and artwork. The show has also been nominated for a few Annie Awards and Primetime Creative Arts Emmy Awards, though it has not won any of them.
Engagement
I do watch the show on a semi-regular basis. Binge watching the show is practically the only to watch new episodes when they come out, and I usually watch the show with my sister who is herself a more die hard fan of the show than I am. (I primary watch it with her because she has the best reacts to the repeated use of cliffhangers at the end of each Stevenbomb).
Alas the show does not have a dedicated website like others do. It does have a Facebook page, but as we have already established that I am not one for social media, I don't visit it.
How the Show Uses Social Media: It doesn't. As I outlined in a previous blog for this class the show does not really use social media for much. It's Facebook page is mostly links to either YouTube videos of clips and songs from the series instead of more useful information like air dates. As for what people say about the show on social media... well... here's a link. It can explain better than me. (I would like to clarify that is not meant to imply it has a shitty reputation, I just cannot condense it so it is easier to show then tell).
Conclusions
After spending the the last four hours straight typing and editing this, I can say my conclusion is that I bet on the right horse. I learned a few things more about the shows writing from those A.V. Club articles and I learned about the logic behind the draconian airing schedule the show has*.
I cannot say much surprised me about the show as I went deeper down the rabbit hole. As I have mention about 345 before in this and maybe other blogs I want to be a writer, and that means that very few writing tricks can surprise me anymore. What I was instead was even more appreciative of the show and what it does to be different from others, and how much it has influenced me in what I want to write.
*Just because I understand it though, does not mean I don't hate it. I still do.
Advertisement 1 (the good, or rather, clever one): Frozen's teaser
1) Now hopefully you've seen the teaser as provided above, but for those of you who did not, it is basically a short comedy skit. Olaf the snowman accidentally sneezes his carrot nose off and it lands in the middle of a frozen-over lake. He then races against a reindeer to reach it, both of them having to use comedic methods of moving due to the ice. Eventually the carrot gets flung back to land and the reindeer runs off ahead of Olaf. Olaf believes his nose gone, until the reindeer returns and gives him his nose... only for Olaf to sneeze again thanks to reindeer fur, except he holds his nose this time, which blows his head off instead.
Now what stands out about this ad is how little it ultimately tells you about the movie it is advertising. When one thinks of a movie trailer, or even teaser, they usually picture them telling at least a few things about the movie. But this one does not. Compare this teaser to that of Star Wars: The Force Awakens. This teaser at least shows you the new characters and teases other elements. Frozen's teaser by contrast tells you little to nothing and seems, for lack of a better word, childish.
2) This is an ad for a Disney movie, who do think the main target audience is? Children; although if you want specifics, probably anyone 12 and younger (not that you have to be that age to enjoy it).
3) This teaser does not really use persuasive techniques, instead it deliberately undersells the movie by making it seem like it is going to be some silly kids film that adults and older kids will not get anything out of; in doing this it persuades older viewers that the film is going be purely for little kids. However as time went on and the release date got closer they eventually released this trailer. This one is a bit more epic and interesting is it not? Releasing a deliberately "bad" trailer got people talking and the kids interested, and as the movie got closer the trailers got more traditionally interesting to everyone. What this ultimately was was a major gamble by the studio, to undersell the film so that when people did see it (because parents have to accompany their younger kids) everyone would be saying the movie was better than they expected thereby persuading others to see it. It was just as much a persuasive advertising campaign as a campaign of trickery and audience manipulation.
4) Frozen remains the highest grossing animated film and the twelfth highest grossing film of all time to this date. You tell me if the advertising method worked. This is also reflected in general audience reception to the film, although if this were a film critiquing class I could tell you why I personally don't like it that much.
1) These are all basic posters for the horror movies, all of which deal with supernatural elements, ghosts, daemons and what have you*. The posters are all ominous and unnerving like most horror movie posters, but you'll notice upon looking at them that they all claim to be based on a true story, something that is commonplace in a lot of movies like those based on history.
2) I honestly have no idea who the target audience for these posters is. I have no idea who the target audience is for horror films, period. I can only imagine it is those people who enjoy being scared because of the adrenaline rush it provides. Which I totally get, although I prefer to get it from video games myself.
3) Basically these posters and the advertising in general claiming these movies are based on real events are trying to persuade you accept the more ridiculous things in the movie. According to Joel Coen (of the Coen Brothers), claiming a story is true gives it that feel of authenticity so that the filmmakers can try to get away with things that the audience might not accept as realistic, like ghosts, daemons, or what have you in the case of horror movies. There is no such thing as ghosts or daemons, and those "true stories" horror films claim to be based on can never be verified because the eyewitnesses who allege they were real were either delusional, lying, or mistaken. In all likelihood their eyes were playing trick on them, the eye is a mysterious thing and it has a habit of doing that, it why Obi-wan says "Your eyes can deceive you, don't trust them."
4) Not all of these horror films were super successful, either critically or financially. Some did better than others so the whole "based on a true story thing" gimmick probably is unimportant to the films success or failure.
*Fun fact, in Greek mythology, daemons are considered good and benevolent instead of evil.
For this I will be using an example that cannot be viewed anymore on any platform, but I still remember vividly (thanks to my sister) as does any fan of this show in all likelihood.
1) There is a rather popular show, you may or may not have heard of it. Steven Universe? Yeah, you probably have. If you don't watch it, someone you know probably does, friend or family.
Now here's the thing about the show that made storyboard artist Ian Jones-Quartey (yes I know I share his first name) comment in a (now deleted) tweet "being a Steven Universe fan is suffering": the show has one of the most draconian and strange airing schedules this side of TRON: Uprising (ask me about that one later). Instead of simply airing a new episode each week like a normal show, with maybe a month or two long gap between the first and second half of the season (the approach taken by fellow cult show My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic), new Steven Universe episodes are instead aired in groups of five called"Stevenbombs" over each day of a week with several months between each Stevenbomb. This despite the fact the seasons have still pretty much finished production. Whether this is the result of the more serialized nature the show has taken, or Cartoon Network (CN) trying to make room for their others show I don't know; I presume it is a combination of both.
So how the hell do you market a show with an airing schedule like that? Well, I'm not sure CN even knows for certain. They still tease the next episode(s) at the end of a Stevenbomb (sometimes), but for the most part their efforts to advertise the show have led to problems since the Stevenbombs half the time seem to come out of nowhere. The example I am using is their approach for the "Out of this World" arc. As a sort of cross-promotion, CN posted all five of the arcs episodes on their website and new streaming service that I'm not sure even exists anymore. Then they promptly removed all except the first episode 24 hours later. The episodes eventually aired later, but not before plenty of people had seen and started talking about the episodes. This method of airing and advertising kind of annoys fans (although I find my sister's reactions to it hilarious).
But what does this have to do with using social media to advertise? Simple, they are not really using it to their advantage. Because the show airs so irregularly it's hard to tell if even the shows creators know when something is going to be released. If CN actually bothered to use the Facebook and Twitter effectively they probably could advertise the Steven Universe a lot more effectively.
2) Having said that, does this approach work instead of using social media? Well, actually yes, it kind of does. In an era where binge-watching has become a thing, this method of airing new episodes starts to make more sense. It's is essentially what Netflix does with its original shows, save that they place entire seasons (usually). And it is not like CN has not used this method before. I'd go into more detail but this is taking long enough already so I'll instead point you to this AV Club article I used while writing this: https://tv.avclub.com/steven-universe-s-frustrating-schedule-is-crucial-to-it-1798246668
3) While I imagine that Rebecca Sugar, the creator of Steven Universe, feels the plight of the shows fan base, considering the current method works I doubt she will being changing it anytime soon. That said if I were in command of the situations (and if I ever make an animated television series like I want to, I will be), I would still recommend the usage of social media despite my personal distaste for it. It is still an effective way to reach the shows audience and let them know in advance when the show is airing new episodes if it has a less traditional airing schedule that people are used to.
In my effort to avoid future walls of text I have split this weeks blog forum into two posts.
Fucking kill me... I hate social media. Having said that...
1) The three people/organizations I pay attention too on Twitter are my collage instructors who recommend following them, Achievement Hunter (a Texas based YouTube gaming group), and Achievement Hunter's parent company Rooster Teeth (an entertainment company specializing in online content). Each reason for watching them is rather simple. I follow my instructors so that I can see any updates to either the class schedule, or if class has been canceled for some reason; after two instances of going to a class and finding out it was canceled I decided this was the smarter option. Achievement Hunter meanwhile sometimes announces what games they will be playing on their Twitter, so it's fun to know whats coming. They also announce when they are going live-stream a game and what game they will play during it; these streams are often in multiplayer online games so it affords me the chance to get into a game with them, just for the fun of it. The reason for Rooster Teeth is much the same as Achievement Hunter, they announce when new content is available; which is perfect since I enjoy much of what they make, Red vs. Blue, Camp Camp, and On the Spot being my favorites.
2) One thing I was tempted to share with one of my friends and did share with my sister was when video game publisher Zen Studios tweeted a video of Achievement Hunter playing one of their games, Infinite Mini-golf to be precise. I suppose I shouldn't be so surprised since in the video,one of Achievement Hunter's members mentions he occasionally speaks with Zen Studios on Twitter. I still thought it was cool that the people who made the game found the videos Achievement Hunter makes with it entertaining. Quite frankly I don't know why other video game developers don't share the sentiment. A Let's Play video on your game is effectively free advertising.
3) Honestly, my participation in the democratic system of this country is limited to voting, very rarely signing petitions, and (if it counts) infrequently watching debates on television. One facet of social media I do find useful though is texting. I often text friends and family like most other people on this planet with a modern cell phone. However I never text long conversations, I only ever text simple questions like if my friends are busy and if they want to hang out, or where mum is and what dinner is going to be. Texting has made communicating simple things like that a lot easier and I can say I am hanging out with friends more often than I was before because we can easily communicate and schedule say... a trip to the movie theatre.
Meanwhile, pay close attention to the wording of the above questions. Notice how I avoided the word "following" when describing my looking at those Twitter feeds? It because I don't technically "follow" any of them. I don't have a Twitter. Or a Facebook, a reddit, an Instagram, or a Pintrest. And I don't want any of them. I have a Tumblr, and given what I can (and might want to) do with it, that will probably be enough. Further, I do in fact try to avoid social media in general; with the exception of Tumblr and DiviantArt (if that counts) because there is artwork there, and I like pretty, awesome or cool artwork. My reason being that as someone who is somewhat socially awkward (I like to think I've gotten better) social media lacks some facets of social interaction I require to function effectively. For example, I have a hard time getting sarcasm from people in real life, my friends have made that abundantly clear, and it is even harder to tell if someone is being sarcastic online since a post has no vocal inflections, tone or facial expressions to make that clear. To me social media is a minefield I do not want to try walking around in; and since texting with my phone works just fine, why would I want two or three other services or accounts for something that does fundamentally the same thing?
I don't.
Mr. Priewe, when you read this, if I absolutely need one of those social media accounts for this class, shoot me an email. I'll probably still be resistant to the idea, but let me know why it is so critical. I personally don't see why. Or if my Tumblr will work, let me know.
Topic II: The Internet
This might be more my speed...
1) The whole I idea of the internet making us (as Sherry put it) "alone together" I get. The problem I have is that I don't really see it in action that often. Maybe it is because times have changed in the five or six years since she did that TED talk (I don't remember the exact release date but I do remember it was not exactly from a year or two ago); or maybe it is because I live in a smaller town. Here everybody knows everybody, so you cannot walk two feet without bumping into somebody you know, either personally or through association, so most people I see walking around are not looking at their phones while they're at it. My family is not really phone people anyway; when we're sitting and eating dinner we're usually watching television or talking. Same thing applies to restaurants, sort of; there we're are more likely to pull out our phones as we wait for our meal. Admittedly my sister has been looking at her phone a bit more frequently than before, but that's probably because she has a girlfriend now.
NOW for something my speed... VIDEO GAMES!!!
2) I have no games on my phone, I used to have Pocket Mortys, but I grew bored of it and deleted it. I have some games on my computer though not many and most of them are single player (on a technical level, we've figured out how to make Surgeon Simulator multiplayer... and simultaneously harder). I have far more games for my video game consoles, both downloaded onto them and on game discs. The games I think I enjoy playing the most are the ones that either require skill to accomplish something, or engage me in the games story (this is pure assumption, my taste in games is so varied it's impossible to nail a specific preference). I enjoy games with single player story-modes like Halo and Assassin's Creed but I also enjoy single player games that require skill and puzzle solving to proceed like Legend of Zelda or Mario. I also enjoy online multiplayer games, or rather the online multiplayer modes for games like Rainbow Six Siege or the aforementioned Halo and Assassin's Creed. Halo is a bit more run around and kill everything not on your team, while Assassin's Creed and Rainbow Six require a bit more strategizing and thinking (both are from Ubisoft... that cannot be a coincidence). Then again there's also Super Smash Bros.,Pokemon, Mario Kart... Infinite Minigolf... again my video game taste is rather varied. The best answer is I like what I like; I don't know why, I just do.
3) Obviously, since I don't have any other ones and only use my Tumblr scantly, I spend no hours a week on social networking; it would be easier to see how many hours I spent on social networking all year. Digital gaming though is a bit easier. I schedule out my week pretty much all the time, so I am generally consistent with how much time I spend playing video games. That said I don't always play online games. When I do it still measures out to about four to six hours a day when I play. When I play more than once a week, it simply depends on how many days out of the week I'm playing. When I play online though, I'm not sure how much I am part of a community. I usually avoid playing with my microphone on, so I don't talk to the strangers I am playing with, some of who may not even live in the same state or even country. I'm not really comfortable around strangers in general, including the ones I actually can see in front of me. The two people I do talk to through in-game party chat is a friend of mine who lives in Portland, and a friend of his who lives in Louisiana, so it is really the only way we get to hang out together semi-regularly. And even then the kid from Louisiana is more my friends friend than mine; but I still count him as a friend regardless.
So I don't really spend a lot of my time playing video games, but that's because I like to even things out with my other interests (like reading and writing) or commitments (like this online class). If I am going to waste time on video games though, I'd rather do so in front of a television with a controller in my hand; I've never really gotten into playing online games on the computer.
Sorry these posts are scarily long walls of text. I'd rather put everything in one place than multiple.
