As media forms and technology continue to converge, more and more people are participating in social media, e-mail, cloud computing, online gaming, SMS / MMS, push notifications, and instant messaging. These technologies create a certain ‘virtual reality’, or ‘pure information space’, immersing and connecting people across great distances in artificial environments for instant, interactive communication (Featherstone and Burrows, 1995).

Perhaps the most important consideration, however, is the creation of ‘co-presence’, or simultaneous presence in both physical and virtual worlds (Gregg, 2007). Technological co- presence has blurred the line between work and leisure, enabling people to collaborate on projects and play at any time. Most importantly, it raises interesting questions about technology’s capacity to improve or degrade human social interaction. Is it a distraction, or does it keep us connected with a broader range of friends impossible to maintain by normal, face-to- face interaction? Featherstone and Burrows (1995, p. 1) state that technological co-presence, for many, “…revives utopian impulses, coupled with the sense that we are on the edge of moving into a reconfigured world which bears little relation to our previous speculations”.

Google is currently developing a new device called ‘Project Glass’, which promises to take technological co-presence to a new level. The device is a set of wearable, augmented reality glasses, which connect to the Internet and GPS, providing users with up-to-date information, notifications and news, and allowing connectivity to Google’s vast range of Web services, including the social network ‘Google+’ (Anonymous, 2012). Google even claims that it will be released to the public this year (Claburn, 2012).

Claburn (2012) does, however, list a number of potential issues with the glasses, beyond the usual issues faced by connected smartphones, including: privacy, redundancy, cost, health (radiation), liability and control. As with all technology, we must exercise caution and moderation. Google’s Project Glass has the potential to revolutionise modern communication, work and leisure, but it could also introduce issues impacting privacy and socialisation. Does it really have a necessary place in our already media- and technology-saturated society?

In recent times, locative media have caused quite a stir, with media outlets arousing fears of privacy invasion, hacking, increased stalker activity and the degradation of human socialisation. One example of recent media sensationalism is Apple and Google’s ‘Locationgate’ of early 2011, where both companies were caught supposedly misusing smartphone users’ location data.

Michel Foucault’s notion of the ‘Panopticon’ has dominated (Manovich, 2006), whereby we are under constant surveillance, often without even knowing it. The truth is, however, that locative media are not really dystopian. Instead, locative carry great potential for social networking, self-actualisation, education and entertainment.

Locative media present opportunities for rich, transmedia storytelling through convergent mobile channels (Chan, 2008). More recently, this has come in the form of augmented reality entertainment and gaming, which gives users a sense of ‘co-presence’ or a ‘doubled perception of space’ (de Souza e Silva and Sutko, 2011).

Following the success of early augmented reality applications like Botfighters (Sweden, 2001-2005) and Mogi (Japan, 2003-2006) (de Souza e Silva and Sutko, 2011), and technology like photo geotagging, new and exciting locative concepts are constantly being developed. One impressive example is ‘Augmented Reality Cinema’, an app currently under development for iOS by a group of London developers, which enables an iPhone user walking through London to view famous cinematic scenes filmed in their recognised location, using the inbuilt camera, screen and GPS module.

‘Augmented Reality Cinema’ and similar future applications could have enormous international benefits for tourism, entertainment and education. Film-makers and advertisers could benefit from the promotion of included films, local businesses could profit by pure association, and features like historical footage could be integrated to produce an ‘augmented reality timeline’, educating locals and tourists alike about their surroundings.

References:

Chan, D., 2008, ‘Convergence, Connectivity and the Case of Japanese Mobile Gaming’, Games and Culture, Vol. 3, pp. 13-25, retrieved 16/03/2012, Sage Publications Online Database.

de Souza e Silva, A. and Sutko, D., 2011, ‘Theorizing Locative Technologies Through Philosophies of the Virtual’, Communication Theory, Vol. 21, International Communication Association, pp. 23-42, retrieved 23/03/2012, Wiley Online Database.

Manovich, L., 2006, ‘The Poetics of Augmented Space’, Visual Communication, Vol. 5, pp. 219-240, retrieved 23/03/2012, Sage Publications Online Database.