As many people may have heard, Snapchat Spectacles have been blowing up across the internet. We first heard about the concept when we started yellow photo booths op up in major cities across the USA.
The writer tries to share an insider input of information, providing the reader with information from a notable source. The writer also then shares their input by stating in the article: ” “But if you’re looking for great video quality, stick with a camera or smartphone. The clips are low-res and really jerky — shooting from your eyes doesn’t allow for any steadiness help from the hands….But then again, no one is buying Spectacles for great video quality. They want Spectacles because they’re colorful, cool and for the time being”. I sense that the writer is trying to conclude that we don’t necessarily need something just because it’s trending or popular.
The evidence in the article used is pictures of the Spectacles, a photo of the yellow photo booth used to buy the Spectacles, and a short tech video describing and reviewing the product.
The evidence is analyzed by the reviewer, Jefferson Graham who shared his input on the Spectacles. It personifies the article by sharing the prospective of a seemingly reputable individual, to verify the information that is being portrayed in the article.
The conclusion to this article is that it’s ultimately not worth it to buy something just because it’s trending or rare. It’s not that convincing because it states how the product is low res and jerky, but that it’s fun and that you should try it anyway. What? Why would I try this product anyway? Why would I spend $129 on a product when I could literally use my smart phone to complete the same function?
There isn’t much validity in this article, because I did find a contradiction when the reviewer was telling me how low quality this product was, but then proceeded to tell me to buy it anyway. It was degrading because it felt like it was an effortless attempt at advertising, and that people should just buy it because this reviewer told me to.
I feel that Manovich’s new media principles of numerical representation and modularity. I feel this related to numerical representation when he stated
“As I will show, new media follows, or actually runs ahead of, a quite different logic of post-industrial society-that of individual customization, rather than mass standardization.” (pg.30) I feel that this very strongly aligns with what Snapchat has done, by creating a new media that is so ahead of it’s time, alongside products i.e. Google Glass. Manovich also explains “Many new media objects are in fact computer programs that follow structural programming style.” (pg. 31) Clearly, Snapchat would have to be a modular programming style or it could not be updated or have constant changing filters. A product like this would have to be modular, or no one would be inclined to buy it.
- Did this article make you interested in the product, or did you find the article contradicting?
- Did you find the evidence provided by the article to be convincing and captivating?
When I first heard that this was being released I never liked the idea. Just having the glasses on your face would make you look ridiculous, you can spend that time of commitment to something more productive in your life. The price tag should be anyones first reasoning to not get the product. I feel your frustration when the reader talks down the quality of the product but yet suggests to give the product a try. I am sure this is not the last version of Snapchat Spectacles and I will be looking forward to what the press will continue to have to say about them. To answer your first question this article did interest me in the product but not in a way to want to go out and purchase a pair. It gave me interest in wanting to see how the consumers react to the product and it left me curious to what the next move will be with Snapchat Spectacles. Nicely done.
One important line that you’ve included in your blogpost I think is really essential in validating why as humans we are fascinated by every new computerized technological advances. The line I’m referring to is: “I sense that the writer is trying to conclude that we don’t necessarily need something just because it’s trending or popular.” But the reality of it is because something is trending or popular on social media, we feel the need to get whatever it is. So I personally think the author’s viewpoint in the article is incorrect because I’ve personally seen the effect of a popular item on social media on consumers such as the recent Supreme logo on the back of MTA’s Metrocard.
Hi c.garofalo, I honestly didn’t know about Snapchat Spectacles until your post. You are totally right by mentioning Google’s “Google Glass” that came out in 2014, and it didn’t work. I see Google Glass and Snapchat Spectacles as the same concept therefore the outcome for Snapchat might be the same. Why? Because today, people have so many options to use videos or photos to do/create these modifications. There is no innovation.
To answer your question, I don’t think I will be interested in this product but I’m glad you post this article, because now I know what this is all about.
Thanks for the info.
Hello. It’s an interesting blog post. I knew this before; my brother got some and I have to say it’s fun and cool. The question I have after reading your post is what would be the characteristics of the media produced by these spectacles according to Manovich and how it would be new media.
Hello,
I read the article you referenced and agree with your thoughts on how the author posts a conflicting review about the Spectacles. However in the last line he states, “But then again, no one is buying Spectacles for great video quality. They want Spectacles because they’re colorful, cool and for the time being, represent an instant status symbol status, because they are so rare.” This perfectly sums up why consumers will buy the Spectacles because they are increasing the demand for them. By launching them randomly in certain cities creates a buzz around the product which will attract consumers.
Before I read the article I did not know they weren’t being sold in regular stores which peaked my interest on how I can obtain the Spectacles. This goes to show that the exclusivity of the merchandise is captivating selling tool.
Yes I agree with T.Green.
It is definitely colorful, fun; it is something new and creative. And we like that. Before I mentioned that my brother had some. So, I’ve watched his videos taken by this spectacle and I have to say that quality is pretty good actually.
And yes you can use smartphone to take video or picture but this is distinctive in a way that if you’re playing ping-pong or using it while zip lining when both of your hands are busy it’s more convenient.
I believe the article doesn’t do the best job at selling the concept of spectacles. I agree with what you wrote, they author discredits the quality of the glasses but encourages the reader to purchase anyway for the fun aspect of it. However, while the article doesn’t convince me I do think I was sueded by the overall advertising of the product. They did a good job of marketing the spectacles as an accessible, reasonable way of recording short videos when you can’t grab onto a phone. Some campaigns I saw were when your are riding a bike or running around with your children. I understood their concept due to their advertising. I think it’s interesting how well the Spectacles did, especially considering the mess that was Google Glass. I believe the design is one of the key reasons for this. Spectacles, for the most part, look like regular sunglasses and can pass in normal settings. Google Glass was always jarring and screamed “I AM TECHNOLOGICALLY SAVY”. I think its a good representation of how we view technology these days. We want the tech, the glasses that record videos, but we don’t want to be seen as though we embrace it. It’s almost ‘uncool’ to enjoy technological advances.
As a social media influencer I found your article great and I think it is so interesting how other people that use social media only for fun view this product ! I own a pair of these myself, and for me, personally , it gives so much new opportunities. I use it to post my work out videos and it definitely makes my YouTube channel more interesting! It is also great when I record my cooking videos, because I don’t need to use anybody to record me when I can’t do it myself as both of my hands are busy. None of this would be possible without this invention so I definitely appreciate it even though the quality is not as great yet.
I too was not very sold into buying Snapchat’s Spectacles. I feel like it’s one of those trendy items to get, but never really use them after one or two times. The author is contradictory in that they tell us to buy the glasses, even if they themselves see it as low quality. In fact, this article convinced me not to buy it with it’s high cost and weak aesthetic.