From writing blog post and gaining information my conference project really developed and changed over the course of the semester, but the main focus remained on humor on the internet. In the beginning I wanted to discuss the development and effects of humor in social media, Vine, Twitter, Instagram, and YouTube. At this point of my conference idea, I was unsure where I wanted to focus the development of humor's in and out of social media.
Later I focused my project/blog on the exploration of how the medium of social media, specifically Twitter, alters comedy in the new age, in relation to an audience. In my blog post IT'LL "MEME" ALOT TO ME, IF YOU READ THIS BLOG POST, I stated that comedy, at the center, will never change, there will always be a ‘set up’ then followed by an audience’s response. The only thing that will change is the medium in which humor is used on. The medium of social media alters humor when comedy is text based and contantains constrictions. Language, tone, and intention are concepts that become heightened when inflection is out of the equation. “Old comedy” (stand-up, improv, and sketch) rely, for the most part, on a physical audience to interject their feelings towards a joke. “New Comedy” (any social media inspired humor) rely on an imaginary audience to interface their feelings of laughter, by favoriting, retweeting, reblogging, etc. Both “Old” and “New” Comedy are dependent on an audience interaction, audience participation in “New Comedy” specifically has become necessary as a relationship generates between comic and audience member; as the audience member approves of the joke immediately and publicly.
With this topic in mind I ventured off exploring weather Twitter is useful or harmful to a comedian. Which I quickly learned that Twitter is neither good or bad for a comedian. Twitter is simply a device to raise the voice of a comedians to a larger audiences. Twitter is a new medium that comedy is expanding, as much as anyone can do with a 140 Character limit. Trying to compare Twitter to traditional forms of comedy is uncomparable. Twitter’s humor is it's own hilarious monster. You can't compare the two media's and suggest that one is better than the other or that one is harmful to comedy. Twitter is simply expanding to different avenues comedy can exist while still influencing old media.
After examining Twitters legitimacy, I reverted my focus back to the comedians- who were the former audience. From the genesis I did not see my topic emphasising the audience participation on a comedic medium of Twitter. Either I did not fully acknowledge the audiences role in the beginning or I just did not want to- the audience, like in social media, made themselves known. For a social media site the audience is the backbone as well it became the backbone of my project. The audience’s part in social media humor became my favorite part of this conference. I loved figuring who were the “imaginary audience” and how did they function as the “former audience.”
My project in particular, I saw the power the audience has. Within my conference project I often compared the traits of traditional comedy shows to that of the Twitter comedy- and I found that both work off the same set up. The comedian or Twitter-er tells their joke and they wait for their audience or followers to interject, with laughter or favoriting their tweet. The initial format of the joke remains the same but what changes is the amount of interjections. Also, reverting back to Rosen, the amount of “comedians” that have arrived because of the change in medium has increased allowing the “audience” to become creatures/comedians.
You're Welcome World,
@iANDRESGOVEA