Hasta La Gadget!

Last time I checked PSY’s Gentleman MV had almost 330 million views on youtube and Gangnam style had more than 1.6 billion. That’s a lot of exposure for a song that is sung in Korean, about a neighborhood in Seoul by an artist that pretty much no-one outside of Korea had heard of this time last year.

So what does that mean about the influence of Korean culture, the image of Korea and the popularity of Korean artists worldwide? Are the viral videos of PSY a testament to Korean soft power? Or reflective of the changing landscape of new media in which hundreds of millions of netizens decided to share this humorous music video by a ‘funny Asian guy’ with their friends?

Soft Power is the ability of states to influence others through means of attraction rather than coercion by using their cultural resources, values and institutions. The term was coined by Harvard Professor Joseph Nye and since then has become the preoccupation of many countries such as the United States, Japan, China, Britain, France, Germany, and of course Korea.

Many Korean music groups, TV dramas and celebrities enjoyed massive popularity in the early 2000′s especially across Asia in the phenomenon known as Hallyu, or the Korean Wave. This trend increased interest in learning Korean, visiting Korea and transformed Korea’s image from just a manufacturer of cheaper high-tech products into a cultural powerhouse that challenged the predominance of Japanese pop culture across Asia.

However in contrast to the clean-cut image associated with many K-pop groups and male idols from the Korean Wave PSY emerged as a comic, satirical and less-than handsome figure (who some mistook for a spoof of rotund North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un) who gained a massive fan-following and cult status.

Gangnam Style ridicules the lifestyle and aspirations associated with living in the upper class Gangnam district of Seoul, a reference that most non-Korean viewers did not get.  Instead for the vast majority, the video challenges the stereotype that Koreans (or Asians in general) take themselves too seriously.

Although does PSY’s popularity really result in a better global image and influence of Korea? Has Gangnam style or Gentleman encouraged more people to learn Korean or visit Seoul?

Coverage of the Korean Peninsular in mainstream global media is still dominated by reports on North Korean’s nuclear ambitions and the threat of crisis and less about what’s going on in South Korea.

Many Koreans are proud of PSY, Korean media often report on PSY’s growing popularity and he has even become the the official tourism ambassador for Korea yet is this really the image that Korea wants to promote to the world? Should the Korean government and tourism agencies really be pushing PSY’s videos as a product of Korean culture to boost soft power?

Also how can one man really represent all the desirable aspects of a nation that wants to promote itself internationally? PSY probably represents Korea in the same way that Jackie Chan represents China. Both became famous around the world for culturally neutral, visual humor, the only difference is that Jackie Chan’s Chinese song’s did not become global hits.

I mean if you are American would you really want Zach Galifianakis to be designated an official tourism ambassador, responsible for spreading American soft power?

PSY’s limited impact in Japan reflects the lack of Korean soft power spread through these music videos. For one thing most Japanese regarded the videos as stupid rather than funny and so were less inclined to share it with their friends, the fact that PSY was a relative no-body before the video went viral meant Japanese would not be interested and finally there are enough slap-stick, satirical comedians in Japan everyday on TV for Japanese people to care than much about PSY.

So the fact that PSY was Korean, probably had nothing to do with the limited reception in Japan.

Back in March, we reported that Apple plans to launch it iRadio streaming music service by this upcoming summer, followed up by a piece in April on its reported signing of various licensing agreements. Now sources are saying the company has run into a snag with Sony over an issue with how much it will pay when users skip songs.

The information comes from the folks over at CNET, who report that “people familiar with the negotiations” say Apple and Sony Music are in contention over how much Apple will pay when a user listens to part of a song, then skips to the next one. Such an issue is reportedly causing frustration amongst the other labels slated to have their music offered through the service, which they anticipate bolstering the music industry.

Sources also have said that iRadio will offer features not found on what will be the service’s biggest competitor, Pandora, such as rewinding a song they want to hear a second time around. The service will reportedly allow an easy way for listeners to buy a song while using iRadio, and will also give labels a cut of the advertisement revenues generated. Apple is considering using audio advertisements.

Unlike Pandora, Apple has chosen to form individual deals with each music label rather than going by federal stipulations, which could potentially give the service more abilities than Pandora, but comes at the cost of running into negotiation problems. One such difference that could be in iRadio’s benefit from direct deals, for example, is having no limit on the number of songs skipped, or a higher skipping allowance than Pandora, which limits skips on an hourly basis with a daily cap.

While the sources provided some information on the matter, they didn’t specify any particular numbers, such as what Sony is wanting per skipped song and what Apple wants on its part. Reportedly, Apple is seeking to have the same terms across its deals with each music label, and as such could have problems if Sony ended up getting a deal that crunches out with more favorable numbers than the other labels.

SOURCE: CNET

Apple iRadio stymied by song-skipping issue says sources is written by Brittany Hillen & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.

Google has said that is possible for Google Play Music All Access service to be made available on other platforms as well.

Like It , +1 , Tweet It , Pin It Original content from Ubergizmo.

Nearly two years ago to the day, Google introduced Music Beta at I/O 2011. But in reality, it was little more than a gigantic cloud to store 20,000 of your favorite tracks. Despite a plethora of rumors that the search giant would beat Spotify to the punch by launching a subscription-based music service in the United States, we got a digital locker that has done little to distract most listeners from giving Rdio, Pandora, iTunes and other like services at least a piece of their heart. Fast forward to today, and Google’s finally joining the bandwagon… in majorly limited fashion.

Google Music All Access is presently only available for mobile as an Android app, and only to users in the US. Moreover, it costs $9.99 — the exact same sum as practically every one of its rivals. Rivals that have multi-year headstarts in terms of mind and market share. (Yes, it’s $7.99 per month if you sign up prior to June 30th.) Google has landed deals with the same “major labels” as everyone else, but even product manager Paul Joyce affirmed to us here at I/O that All Access doesn’t have access to any exclusives. In a post-keynote meeting with Joyce, he noted that this is only the start for the product. Naturally, Google’s going to do its finest work on its own platform, but it’s certainly odd to see iOS users left out in the cold given Google’s acknowledgement of its importance just minutes earlier.

Filed under: Home Entertainment, Google

Comments

Source: Google Play

Google announced their own music streaming subscription service today during Google I/O, and while it’s essentially nothing that we haven’t seen before, it provides Google users who are deep into the company’s ecosystem the opportunity to escape Spotify or Rdio and come back home to Google where the service is integrated with other Google apps. Let’s have a quick look at the latest competitor in streaming music.

Overall, we’re dealing with many of the same features that we’ve already seen with services like Spotify, Rdio, and Pandora, but Google has put its own spin and look into All Access. The Explore page is probably where most users will spend their time if they’re interested in discovering new artists. This section includes personal recommendations, featured artists and albums, as well as new releases.

As what may appear to be obvious, All Access is simply added on to the current Google Music app, so all the previous features of the app still remain. You even still have the ability to upload all of your own music the app and have it combined with the streaming music that you have picked out, creating one large library of music that includes a mix between the two. This is something that only Spotify has, and it’s a mighty-awesome feature to have.

All Access also has a Pandora-like feature where you can create radio stations of sorts based on a single artist or song. From there, you can give a song a thumbs up or thumbs down to make the app continuously learn about the music that you enjoy most. You also have the ability to rearrange future songs in the automated playlist in the radio station, as well as the ability to swipe away the songs you don’t want to listen to.

As for the user interface, nothing hasn’t changed too much. You get the typical Google look with an orange and white color theme. Frankly, I’m not a huge fan of the squared-off boxes and shapes that many Android apps have, but it certainly doesn’t hinder the music listening experience at all, and it’s something that I can easily get accustomed to.

One huge problem with All Access is cross-platform support. It is available on the web in any web browser, turning your laptop and desktop into its own DJ of sorts, but as far as mobile apps outside of Android, Google has yet to make that expansion. The great thing about Spotify is that it’s available on pretty much any platform, including iOS, BlackBerry, and Windows Phone. We’d be surprised if Google released their Music app for all of these platforms, so for users who yearn for cross-platform support, that seems to be where All Access’s weakness is.

As for price, All Access will cost $9.99 per month, but if you sign up before June 30, you’ll only play $7.99 per month. That price seems to be a permanent thing, so if you sign up before the end of June, you’ll only pay $7.99 for as long as you have an All Access subscription. Furthermore, All Access comes with a 30-day free trial, whether you sign up before June 30 or not.

Overall, Google Play Music All Access isn’t anything revolutionary, and we’re frankly a little disappointed that Google is simply getting their feet wet first before diving in. Of course, this is a smart move sometimes, but instead of boldly diving in and giving Spotify and Rdio a run for their money, Google is simply taking it easy to get a feel for the market, which could put them further behind in the music-streaming race.

Google Play Music All Access hands-on is written by Craig Lloyd & originally posted on SlashGear.
© 2005 – 2012, SlashGear. All right reserved.