Page - 38 - in JRFM - Journal Religion Film Media, Volume 01/01

38 | Christian Wessely www.jrfm.eu 2015, 1/1, 37–42 own life and to convey it to anyone else. Consequently, meaning is intrinsically tied to communication, hence to media.1 We are encountering a new situation in the age of digital media. first and fore- most, mobile devices are more and more considered a natural extension of our selves, which leads to immediate medialization. everyone is – at least potentially – always not only consumer but also producer at the same time.2 secondly, new media are dynamic. Movies have alternative scenes and endings that can be chosen from the DVD; a contemporary computer game usually does not provide the exact same situ- ation twice; a Facebook page or a blog evolves unpredictably. This is a challenge be- cause our tried and tested tools for media analysis are strongly bound to a linear un- derstanding of media products, while interactive media are non-linear by definition. roger Odin has written a remarkable book on alternative methods of analysis3 – but his approach raises some questions, too. PerCePTiON MeChaNisMs aND The VisUal iMaGe The lifestyle dictated by Western european and North american mainstream culture depends on audio-visual impressions. all through the day the individual is embedded in a continuous stream of sounds and pictures, of video clips and songs, of billboards and newsflashes – forming a field of perception that has hardly anything to do with the biological reasons for which the sensory organs have developed.4 even at night, the sound of the TV from the adjacent flat or music from the street can be heard, and advertising illuminates our bedrooms, leaving an imprint on our subconscious that is inevitable. having evolved in a hostile environment and consequently adapted to survive, our eyes and ears are instruments that we trust.5 We know of course that we are subject to misperception from time to time; however, audio-visual perception is something we take seriously and base our decisions on. Doubt, if any, arises in second place.6 1 according to harry Pross (1970), one has to distinguish between primary media that do not require any technical devices, secondary media that need such devices for transmission but not reception, and tertiary media that need such devices for transmitting and receiving a certain content. This essay is about the second and third types. 2 yet, this promise, which makes what was considered as “Web 2.0” some years ago incredibly attrac- tive, is by no means fulfilled. Most participants are consumers only and contribute solely very short messages and/or pictures. The overuse of “selfies” and pictures of one’s food could be worth a mas- ter’s thesis; even so, the upload/download ratio of a really important platform like YouTube or Face- book is around 1:10. 3 Odin 2011. 4 lamb 2011, 64–69. 5 This goes, of course, for our complete sensorial apparatus; however, sight and hearing are more im- portant for survival due to their ability to cover large distances, whereas touch, smell and taste only operate at the closest range. hence, sight and sound have been more crucial for the larger part of humankind´s history. 6 Much has been written about this, but ernst Gombrich’s Art and Illusion, especially the chapter Truth and Convention is probably among the best texts on this subject; Gombrich 2004, 55–78.