Response to week 4 reading Free! why $0.00 is the future of business.

I am an advertising company's dream...It's not as though I intentionally go out to spend money, but that is exactly what happens when I see something that screams 'free' - it just sucks me right in. And I know I'm not Robinson Crusoe there.

It could be as innocent as a cereal box at the supermarket, which says 'buy this 5 kg box of rice bubbles and you receive a 'snap, crackle, pop' children's calculator for free!' Once I've bought the box home (that will take our small family about six months to eat) I notice the small print, where I have to send $5 for postage & handling costs, so it's not really FREE after all!

Then there's the cliche I succumb to the most 'buy one get one free'. So instead of buying one top, I'll get two for the price of one. Never mind they bump the price up for the first top so you are really paying for two anyway.

My most recent visit to the supermarket found me buying 2 x 10 litre cans of olive oil because they were 50% off, meaning I was getting two for the price of one. My husband thinks I'm insane as it will take us a year to get through all the oil - ha, but look how much money I saved us!!

Just last Sunday, the Melbourne Herald Sun had a small add on the bottom of the front page declaring 'FREE PETROL'. Looking inside, the article said 'your chance to win free petrol'. But think of how many people would have seen the front page and bought the paper? The term FREE on it's own is enticing, but put the word 'petrol' with it and watch the newspapers fly out the door.

My biggest time waster at the moment is facebook. I just can't seem to tear myself away from it, searching for long lost school buddies, checking out the photos of someones new baby, it's never ending. But is it really free? I consider the fact that I'm logged into the internet for 10 hours a day not 'free'.

This obsession with facebook is costing me $79.95 per month just in internet access costs. (I know I can get cheaper broadband and that I'm getting ripped off - long story, for another time). Then there are the clever advertisements down the left hand side of the page. I'm scared to click on them, because the one and only time I did, I apparently asked someone to send me an email every week telling me how I can win a greencard to the USA. So you see, FREE doesn't really mean FREE at all. Oh, hang on, I found one example...here.

Response to week 3 reading - user-generated content

So anyone who has a mobile phone can now become a journalist?

That seems like a kick in the guts to all those students who spend years earning their Journalism degree!

I understand that with a mobile phone, 'news' or an event can be immediately accessed, but do citizen journalists actually have a clue about what the public want to see? It seems they do.

It is apparent to me that the majority of any user-generated content that is sent to news desks is during or after a major event or incident.

Or when Mother Nature reminds us she is still in charge with unusual weather events.

Some websites, including theage.com support user comments on all articles. Once a website opens up to user comments they're on the way toward citizen-journalism.

It seems that photos or video provide the most of user-generated content.

Sites such as Flickr that had the world's first photographs or the Australian Embasy bombing in Jakarta in 2004. And again in the London bombings in 2005.

It has become apparent that if one just happens to be in the vicinity of a catastrophe, then you might be an accidental journalist who can email or SMS the footage to a newsdesk.

Response to week 2 reading on Convergence

I haven't read a hard copy newspaper for months, and very rarely do I watch the news or any current affairs programs on television.

I'm on my PC nearly every day and theage.com is my home page, so I sit at the PC to have a look to see what is happening in the world each day.

This is because reading and watching takes time. Time I don't seem to have any more.

The only time I get to myself during the course of a day is an hour or so during the afternoon (when children are taking a nap) or an hour or so at night once they are asleep.

So as this precious 'me' time is exactly that - precious - I find the quickest way possible to do certain things, such as finding out that day's world events.

It's not just the mum's and dad's who have become time-poor.

I'm sure most people are in the same boat. I can see why mobile internet has become so popular. Why wait till you get home to watch the Olympics, when you can now watch it on the train ride home.

In a generation where you can pay someone to do your shopping, clean your house or book your holidays, it's easy to see why people look for the convenience factor.

However I do wonder what the affect convergence has on the older generation (I'm talking age group 65+).

The oldies I know look forward to buying the paper and sitting down to read it and do the crossword.

I know they would struggle to read an article on line, not only because they aren't computer savvy, but because their eye sight is not what it used to be!

Squinting at the screen just to try and read a few words, I think they would give up altogether if a video clip started playing.

I'm in my early thirties and I find it annoying trying to read articles that are continuously navigating to other pages on the net. If this is the way journalism is headed, how will the older folk cope with it?