Living on Edge: South Park

     Okay, this one may be painfully obvious, but who could argue that South Park is not an edgy media text? The obvious edginess to South Park is definitely in terms of its racy content, but I think it also fits nicely into Curtin's terms as well. For Curtin, edginess in media is such that strays from the predictable outline of popular media. This media does not need to rely on mass audiences to do well and often does not appeal to mass audiences. However, as Curtin describes, this media is attractive to those with "deep pockets" because of its surprising success and thus a sort of merger has happened within the media world where edgy media is exposed to wide audiences in more familiar strategies that have worked for popular cookie-cutter media. I think that South Park is the embodiment of this model.


     When South Park first began it did not receive well. It was offensive and unappealing to the wide audience, but it was able to maintain that cult following and was able to grow. Regardless of its success, the creators of South Park didn't care what the wide audience was interested in, and in fact, they seemed to aim for making people uncomfortable. They definitely were not trying to win any favors in Hollywood, because a majority of episodes are centered around making fun of celebrities in very demeaning ways. However, the show is obviously caught on and has definitely grabbed the attention of the wide audience.

     Curtin describes how corporations that are exhibiting edgy media are focused on a particular audience, but will adhere to "big brother" corporations in order to get their brand out there. This is the cookie-cutter strategy I mentioned earlier. I believe that South Park has done this by having its show aired on the CW. While, not every foul word is allowed on Comedy Central, the show is very censored on the CW because of the network's standing. While I believe that South Park in its beginning was meant to be a huge metaphorical as well as literal middle finger to many subjects and topics, this move to a more strict platform allowed it to cross cultural platforms and open itself up to a wider audience all while keeping it's edginess.

      This would be the neo-Fordism that Curtin discussed. The cookie-cutter shows that are aimed at the wide audience are stuck in their ways. South Park's initial aim at specific audiences provided the support needed to grow allowed them to branch out and target other specific audiences, thus making their audience wider.

      So, does South Park and other edgy media unite or divide society? I think that it has the potential to unite by dividing. That is, it will make people uncomfortable and it will get people to think differently. The way I see it, there are two attitudes towards South Park. There are those who will get offended and not give it another thought. Then there are those, like me, who may get offended by some (or perhaps by none) of the content, but gives the show a chance. This is what I think the creators of South Park intended for their audience and this is why I think the show has been able to grow. People like me are, in a sense, divided from their initial attitudes and able to identify with others who have done the same and thus create unity. Will there be perfect unity? No, because not everyone will like the media. Will there be division? Yes, but there is unity within that.

     Therefore, the question of edgy media being creative or problematic falls on whichever side you are on. If you are stuck in your ways and can't see past the way things have always been, then this kind of media is nothing but problematic. If you are able to allow yourself to be vulnerable to this kind of media, then I believe you can see the creativity. South Park may not seem to be creative and be nothing more than fart jokes (perhaps it sometimes is), but I would argue that it is creative. From its beginning to where it is now, it did not come without creativity. Now, technology also plays a role, but I believe that creativity is found in how the technology is used as well. In short, this question is subjective and is all about perspective. Here is a preview for the documentary Six Days to Air: The Making of South Park for a glimpse at how creative the team behind the show is:

     In all, edgy media is more pervasive with advancements in technology and globalization, allowing such media to transcend media platforms and cultural barriers. It challenges people to think differently and consider something they aren't used to encountering. In the end, edgy media like South Park is changing the playing field in which media is produced, encountered, and reproduced.

On the Edge

 Media has changed dramatically since the 1950’s.  Up until this time, major publications such as Life, Time, and Newsweek guided the American public in their collective thinking and buying. With the availability of televisions in the average family home, three television networks began to influence the information and entertainment through programming and advertisements. NBC and CBS, along with a smaller ABC were endorsed and given licenses in all the major cities by the government. Smaller regional television companies usually carried the national programs as well. This gradually changed with time as society moved from Fordism to the Post or Neo Fordism era. Large corporations, not only in media but worldwide, changed their structure and mentality. They became less corporate headquarter centered and more diverse in their geographical locals. Corporations started to have fewer employees on their actual payroll and outsourced to the casual labor market in order to save money. In the media business, similar changes were also made. Now days, large media corporations hire their creative staff as subcontractors and the former centers of entertainment, New York and Hollywood, are now becoming spread-out all over the country. Due to the incredible technological advancements in media, such as cable and satellite as well as the Internet, government has less input and many policies are now ignored.

One of the major changes in the media corporations is the move from mass production of TV shows or magazines to more culturally diverse markets. Shows and advertisements are no long produced for the mass audiences but tailor-made for racial or ethnic diversity. Some of these industries are considered on the edge with their content and focus. The hundreds of channels on TV as well as the information on the Internet make almost everything available to the general public all over the world. In today’s world, we can constantly interact with the media. I believe that social media is one of the biggest and fastest growing industries. Facebook allows people to catch up with old friends and as well make new ones with the same interests.  With our technology, it is possible to be connected to Facebook 24 hours a day through our cell phones, computers, and tablets.  People can share their opinions, interests, emotions and concerns with whoever is interested. This has also made it easier for companies to advertise their products. People may look up activities or different things that might interest them personally and are able to find advertisements of their liking. For an example, I like the concepts of extreme sports. Companies such as Red Bull that sponsor these types of events, have their own Facebook Fan Page which allows people to follow different events that the companies might put on and as well as advertise their products. It is an opportunity for not only you, but your friends that may be interested in the same hobbies or interests to be exposed to merchandise or ideas. Companies can become more creative in their approach to selling their products because they can focus on a certain type of audience.

            Although some people might argue that using Facebook can divide a society because there is less social physical interaction, I disagree. Facebook has evolved from Instant Messaging and My Space, to fulfill the needs of the public. The service actually unites society because it gives people the opportunity to interact with not only friends, but many others on the periphery of their personal circle. It allows communications with people that otherwise would not be connected to you as well as allowing companies to sell their products and ideas in a creative and “edgy” manner. 

Livin' on the Edge Digging Deeper

    During the Fordist Era, "the entire national audience was the primary target of culture industries (Curtin)."  They did not have hundreds upon hundreds of channels for a variety of different demographics to watch, so they had to pay more attention to the families.  Now, unlike the Fordist Era, "the Post-Fordism researchers now gather and sell information about demographically defined subsets of the national audience, and advertising agencies now commonly advise their clients that particular groups of viewers are often more important than synchronic national exposure (Curtin).  It is easy to see how edgy content is now allowed to be created.  During the Fordist Era, it was simply not possible for a broadcasting companies to create edgy content due to much fewer channels that were available.  With the few stations that you had, you wanted to make the most out of what you had, and that needed to be tailored for families.  Now, in the Post-Fordist Era, particular groups are what make this edgy content thrive.

    There are several examples of edgy text such as video games like that of Red Dead Redemption, and movie series like Jackass, but I'm going to choose Grand Theft Auto as my "edgy" text.  This example goes back perfectly to what Curtin said about the Post-Fordism era.  This game does not have synchronic national exposure.  However, what it does have is a particular demographic who follow it like a cult.  I have played this game like many other people my age and you cannot buy just one game, you have to buy multiple different series.  This is how the game is successful.  It does not need 50 million different people to buy the game.  All Rockstar needs are 3-5 million loyal gamers who will buy all 5 or 6 games as they keep making new ones.
 
    Now, onto why I think this text is edgy and if I think it divides or unites society.  It's obvious that the content is edgy just from the picture of the cover of the game.  It is not a normal video game cover.  There are men hanging out of a car doing a drive-by shooting on the cover of the game.  Obviously, I do not believe media texts like these unite society, however, I do not think they divide society.  Yes, there are people who play this game who will commit stupid crimes like they see in the game, however, I believe those types of people will commit the crime no matter what game they are playing.  I have played this game for hours upon hours, and it has not divided me from any part of society.  It did not unite me in any way, but it definitely did not divide me.  Is it problematic or an example of creativity?  If anyone has ever played the games all the way through, they would obviously say it is an example of creativity.  The amount of thought and information that goes into all of the Grand Theft Auto games is overwhelming.  The video above shows some of the creativity in Grand Theft Auto.

Rockstar? More like Rockstop treating your workers like shit

Rockstar, the company responsible for big hits such as the Grand Theft Auto series, Max Payne 3, and Red Dead Redemption has been very popular among gamers and very unpopular with mothers. The stimulating content often leans toward violence and other controversial topics that excites many and offends more. This has been a dispute over the actual content of the games, but Huntemann's article brings to light some harsh realities about the actual working conditions within Rockstar.

            As discussed in Huntemann's article, the video game industry is often thought of as a dream job, filled with laid-back bosses and entertainment within the workplace. Huntemann describes how this is not necessarily the case with Rockstar, as workers are treated poorly, receive raises rarely, and are expected to work long hours in overtime without pay. (a period referred to as "crunch time")These stressful conditions permeate into the lives of the workers' families, sparking a movement among the spouses of workers to list their complaints with the working conditions. This "cool factor" about the gaming industry is shattered by this movement, which asks people to throw away their rose-colored glasses.
            Personally, I've enjoyed Rockstar's games immensely, but, after having read about this "crunch time" situation, I can see potential evidence within the games' content that could be indicative of over-stressing. Red Dead Redemption, a sandbox-style western that echoes the game play of the Grand Theft Auto series is almost as famous for its glitches as it is for its wonderful game play. There are Youtube videos galore of hilarious instances where humans take on the scripting characteristics of animals, or vice versa. A shopkeeper will appear in the air, flapping its wings and cawing. A dog will start speaking Spanish to you, and help you shoot at enemies. You will be walking through the forest and suddenly you see a bear riding a horse. These glitches appear often and are the cause of much hilarity, but they could be indicative of a couple of things: either sloppiness due to the stressful conditions, or the game designers' way of blowing off steam.

            Havenz and Lotz mentions a business model in which workers are given more flexibility for the majority of the work on a project, but are required to enter this "crunch time" period for more than a couple of weeks, where the hours get longer, and workers are not able to spend as much time with their families. Huntemann's article brings to light how time away from family is not the only drawback from Rockstar's "crunch time." The article also avoids discussion of this "flexible" period, making it sound as though it does not even exist for Rockstar's workers.

Labor Practices in Video Game Design

Nina B. Huntemann, in her article Irreconcilable Differences: Gender and Labor in the Video Game Workplace, outlines the labor controversy between the sexes within the video game industry.  She puts emphasis on Rockstar San Diego's action against unfair treatment of employees and the people who depend on them.  Rockstar Spouse, a lobbyist for these concerns declared “action must be taken to protect the rights of employees and those who depend on them.”  There is apparently rampant unfair treatment of these employees that include, unfair deadlines and work schedules.

 But perhaps these "crunch time" deadlines are a result of the more relaxed liberal model of the workplace.  This style can lead to an increase of creative potential, but as seen here, can lead to seemingly tense situations.  These types of conditions are obviously detrimental to the industry's production capacity, but maybe this limited production is just an inverse correlation of the creative potential.  However, it could also lead to unfinished sections throughout development, which would lower the quality of production.  It seems as though the solution for this problem is to possibly tighten the schedules of developers within the industry to keep them on task and meet deadlines in a timely manner.

digging deeper 7

In Nina Huntemann's article over gender and labor in video game industry, she talks about the idea that video game design and production, much like film, music, and television, is considered to be a relatively glamorous job. Rather than coming to work everyday in a suit and sitting behind a desk, game design offers an alternative to this type of job in a more relaxing atmosphere. However, through people like EA Spouse and Rockstar Wives, it has been brought to attention that this "cool factor" of working in a creative industry is not as glamorous as it seems. The wives of these employees have complained of unreasonable hours, unpaid labor, and a loss in the sense of being valued by the company. As a result, this cool factor of the job has replaced with resentment towards its grueling labor conditions which not only affect the employees, but the entire family. 

As these feelings of employees grow stronger, it can be easily seen how it affects the production of games. Because employees feel like they have been, "turned into machines as they are slowly robbed of their humanity," I think this can have a profound effect on the creativity and general sense of ownership towards the game that is produced. If a designer sees his job as autonomic and something like a typical desk job, I think it is evident that it will affect his creativity towards producing a game. And although the mass amount of hours that employees are having to work may increase production in the short run, I feel that as resentment towards the companies grow, production will eventually decrease. Rather than the designers feeling attached to a game, as they should, the disdain resulting from unfair labor conditions will cause these employees to lose some of this passion for what they do, leading to a separation between designers and the games they produce. 

These labor conditions have come about as a result of the new symbol economy and post-Fordism. As companies in this system frequently practice just-in-time production, it requires employees the work crunch time, as the article mentions. Crunch time puts a great deal of pressure on employees and their families as it is a time of intense work that forces employees to work long days for weeks at a time. Also, the post-Fordism era has led to a rise in casual work because it allows for a direct connection between costs and production. This has resulted in a lack of benefits for employees, including lack of "health insurance, retirement contributions, or wages for sick and vacation time" (Haven & Lotz, pg. 198). The new symbol economy and post-Fordist era have seemed to lower quality of labor conditions and a result, I think we will continue to see people like EA Spouse and Rockstar Wives who are unsatisfied with the current situation.

Labor Practices in Video Game Design

Keywords: Video game, work conditions, Rockstar

In the article Gender and Labor in the Video Game Workplace by Nina B. Huntemann, she states that the work conditions of game development “challenge assumptions about digital labor and the ‘cool factor’ of creative production.”  The assumptions that she is referring too are the assumptions that a job in the creative industries, especially a job in video game development, are dream jobs, with relaxed dress code, open-space offices, flexible hours, and good pay, so who wouldn’t want a job like that?  In reality however, a job in creative production, specifically video game development, is not nearly this glamorous and laid back.  In the article, a group of wives whose husbands are employed by Rockstar, a video game developing company, complain about the working conditions that their significant others are subject to.  The wives complaints include “prolonged unpaid overtime (referred to in the industry as “crunch time”), declining morale and depression, physical and emotional suffering, lack of raises or cost of living increases despite record-breaking game sales, and the toll these working conditions take on the domestic life of employees, spouses and their children.”  Employees complain of dealing with inhumane deadlines and working hours, and the employees and their families are suffering because of it.

Subpar working conditions affect production in all industries in this Post-Fordist era, and it is definitely seen in the video game industry.  It’s an old saying that you do your best work when you are happy and enjoy what you’re doing, and from my previous experiences this saying is definitely true, so these working conditions are definitely affecting the production of the games.  If the employees designing and producing the games aren’t happy, then the production and design of videogames will suffer.  As a slight gamer myself, I have seen a bit of this lately.  Besides the franchise games like Call of Duty, Halo, FIFA, and Madden to name a few, no games have really been catching my eye like they used to.  It seems like the games are not nearly as creative as they used to be, and I believe this is a direct result of the unhappy employees in the video game industry.

This phenomenon in the video game industry as well as other creative industries is an example of the push towards casual work in today’s ‘symbolic economy’.  The employees are seeing more flexibility and creative control in their workplaces; however this relaxed atmosphere leads to intense periods of crunch time, which are periods of intense work that can have workers working up to 20 hours a day, in order to meet deadlines and such.  Because of these intense periods of work, which are getting longer and more frequent, the employees are suffering, and will continue to suffer unless they organize and fight for better work conditions.