The first week of TMMT Studies

Theoretical issues:

1) During the lecture I was able to recollect in mind my previous studies of the philosophical issues (such as Plato’s and Descartes conceptions) and add to them the concepts of Russell’s theory of knowledge, which was new for me. I’ve noticed that the platonic concepts of knowledge apparently connected with the Russell’s epistemological theory. So, Plato distinguishes 2 types of knowledge: 1) knowledge from perception of physical objects and their “shadows” (pistis and eikasia), 2) knowledge from comprehension and analysis (dianoia and noesis) [1]. Russell’s knowledge of things and knowledge of truth refer to this tradition and also rethink it.

2) We have performed an interesting analysis of Russell’s descriptive theory at the seminar. When I was reading through “The problems of philosophy” some points were incomprehensible for me. For instance, Russell believed that propositions are meaningless if there are not true or false. In article “On denoting” he also explains that the statements aren’t supposed to describe the non-existing objects and how the sentences can be logically reformulated into signification of existing objects [2]. I still couldn’t see why only existing objects can be signified? After the seminar I knew that this particular point was frequently critisized. So I’ve understood how even solid theoretical concepts could be doubted in order to gain the proper understanding of the problem.

3) We started to discuss how these theoretical studies are related to the media. The theory of knowledge is closely related to our object, because the knowledge simply cannot exist without the media to translate this knowledge through.  In the first place the human language mediates the messages but it also distorts the pure logical schemes (like the Russell’s denotation). We can see how language categorizes the entities by giving the names for them. In the same way - by the transmission of messages – all the media create a new message itself, or as it said by MacLuhan “the medium is the message” [3].

Practical skills:

1) I’ve found out how to check the impact factor of scientific journals

2) I’ve got an impression of how *briefly* describe/discuss research articles and what would be the main points to stop at

---

1. Plato. The Republic. Book 6

2. Russell, Bertrand. On denoting.

3. MacLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extentions of Man

Assigment 1

“Crowdsourcing and outsourcing: the impact of online funding and distribution on the documentary film industry in the UK” by Inge Ejbye Sørensen publisched in “Media, Culture and Society” (2012 34: 726), IF 1.4

The main research question proposed in the article: How do schemes of online funding and distribution of documentaries impact on the traditional models of documentary production?

Sorensen argues that schemes of online funding and distribution have become attractive for documentary producers due to the decline and polarization of documentary budgets in the UK. Researcher examines history of trends in documentary funding in Britain and cases of documentaries online funding using both quantative methods (analysis of annual reports and statistics from TV stations, government, and regulators) and qualitive methods (interviews with documentary producers and commissioners).

Theoretical basis of the current study is concepts of Benkler (networking public sphere and its participatory potential) and Bourdieu (the distinction to the equation, supported by broadcasters in this context).

Key findings: 1) reported a rise in number of documentary films financed online, 2) described online financing models based on micro-financing (crowdfunding) and investment in shares, 3) changed the collaboration between filmmakers and broadcasters: the former avoid editorial control and retain copyrights, the latter benefit from access to ready-made documentaries, which they could commission without any risks of production.

According to the study accessible technology of online funding has lowered the entry barriers for film creators. Nevertheless author comes to main conclusion that the gatekeeping mechanisms are still in place. Sørensen says: “Gatekeeping can no longer be seen as a concept confined to an institutional context”. I think the latter notice is interesting and represents the possibility of prospective research of non-industrial barriers at the film production markets.

----

The core idea of Russell's theory is differentiation of 2 types of knowledge: knowledge of things and knowledge of truth. Those two types refer to the two meanings of the word "to know": 1) to know smth from immediate experience,  i.e. by our senses; 2) to have an opinion about smth. The second type of knowledge described by Russell as "judgments" ("the sense which applies to our beliefs and convictions”, Chapter 4).

Russell describes knowledge of things distinguished to knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description. The former is independent from the knowledge of truth, and conversely the latter is always based on it. According to Russell, knowledge by acquaintance is obtained from the "sense data" (“things that are immediately known in sensation“, Chapter 1). The immediate sense-data extended by the acquaintance by memory (memory as a source of sense-data collected in the past) and acquaintance by introspection (self-consciousness as a source of knowledge about the different states of consciousness).

According to Russell the physical objects and the consciousness of other people belong to those subjects that cannot be known by acquaintance, but only by description. Russell defines the “definite description” as “phrase of the form 'the so-and-so' (in the singular)” in opposition to 'ambiguous' description described by a phrase of the form 'a so-and-so' (Chapter 5). Definite descriptions are used to describe such characteristics of object which only refer to this particular object.

In his theory of knowledge of truth Russell uses the concept of fact: the statement is true if it corresponds to the fact. Generally we can understand knowledge as something that applies to reality, which could be seen as collection of facts. Then any true statement means that we know some fact. But Russell prefers to talk about only "knowledge of true" (not "knowledge of facts"), so he does not define the specific relations between terms "true", "fact" and "knowledge".