<div>That's a very good point actually,as the analysis from the perspective of political economy does not preclude the micro-analysis and actually any good study of the media today should focus on the political economy aspect. My point was that there seems to be a great division today between critical approach: focussing on exploitation mostly and 'celebratory cultural studies'. My point was that both pluses and minuses have to be taken into account, both macro and micro and the analysis of popular culture (again I refer to works of Fiske) seems to me to be a good example where there is a serious analysis of the critique of exploitation and the response of ordinary people to this exploitation. I quote Fiske:</div>
<div>"Until recently, the study of popular culture has taken two main directions. The less productive has been that which has celebrated popular culture without situating it in a model of power....The other direction has been to situate popular culture firmly withing a model of power, but to emphasise so strongly the forces of domination as to make it appear impossible for a genuine popular culture to exist at all...Recently, however, a third direction has begun to emerge...It, too, sees popular culture as a site of struggle, but, while accepting the power of the forces of dominance, it focusses rather upon the popular tactics by which these forces are coped with, are evaded or are resisted." (Fiske, 1989, p. 20)</div>
<div>My point was that we should maybe look more into this third direction. Looking at facebook's users as passive dopes misses an important fact about Facebook: it does do something in our lives, people love it (in their majority) and while it is a capitalistic organization, it actually did start as project in a student dormitory...Why, in fact, would people do a massive exodus to something else? Why? And how alternative mediums would sustain themselves?</div>
<div> </div><div>Thank you for the reference to the book about surveillance, - i will certainly read it!</div><div> </div><div>Ekaterina Netchitailova<br><br></div><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 2:18 PM, Jernej Prodnik <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jernej.prodnik@fdv.uni-lj.si">jernej.prodnik@fdv.uni-lj.si</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;padding-left:1ex;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-left-width:1px;border-left-style:solid" class="gmail_quote">
<div lang="SL" vlink="purple" link="blue">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hi,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">just a short
observation: both exploitation and commodification actually have little do to
with playfulness or having fun on the Facebook or Twitter (or anywhere else,
where these processes might occur). It’s not what political economy analyzes
and it’s actually not that important question, because it’s simply not its subject
matter. Which doesn’t mean it’s not important. This is a common
misunderstanding that has been retained in cultural studies for decades now,
for reasons unknown to me. But I guess it stems from another misunderstanding -
of what is actually the goal of critique of political economy. It's definitely
not to transparently moralize about an ongoing world-situation and corruption
of the ugly capitalists (focusing on bad apples in an otherwise perfectly working
system is, quite on the contrary, approach of the non-critical economy), but to
try to give an explanation of an objective fact through means of abstraction (even
if this can, indeed, be fundamental ground for people's moral outlook and
political action, which was of course the underlying goal of Marx). Abstraction
in the given example meaning: if the system were in fact to function perfectly,
would capitalists still need exploitation? Of course, how else would they
extract surplus value? Both concepts, exploitation and commodification, are therefore
quite “technical” and don’t focus on the good and the bad (... historically,
conditions in the production process were of course terrible, but Marx could’ve
easily omitted these examples there are plenty - from Capital and the argument
in the abstract would be no different).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">These are quite different
levels of critique you’re mentioning, with different epistemological presuppositions,
and there weren’t so many authors that would successfully bridge this divide
(Vincent Mosco in his Digital Sublime being one of the celebrated exceptions). There
has been a huge debate in the nineties regarding these questions and I guess
most of the people, participating in it, simply got tired of it. But cultural
studies and political economy are not necessarily differentiated when it comes
to the macro/micro questions ... Neither commodification nor exploitation are for
example ‘macro questions’, they develop and happen in everyday-life situations
that actually need to be analyzed on the micro-level, at least in the beginning,
to construct a viable macro-theory (besides, why joyful exploitation so easily occurs
could be critically analyzed on another, ideological level).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">So, to put it shortly:
people can be exploited in the production process even if they crazily enjoy what
they’re doing at the same time. Neither of these processes preclude people from
rejecting these processes if they find them worth struggling against - for
example through making fun out of Facebook in different Facebook groups. How effective
the latter is should be quite obvious though: it’s not. To put it in Marx’s
terms: they’re just writing about Facebook, but the point should be to change
it (if these people are so “critical” about it). And the only way to stop exploitation
by Facebook is probably a mass exodus from the Facebook to another platform or
to give as little information to FB as possible. Making fun of Facebook in
groups can actually even increase passivity and be quite cynical.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">I’m just finishing my
review of the volume “Surveillance on the Internet”, which includes some very
good chapters from the perspective of critique of political economy. You might
find it interesting, especially considering the fact these chapters mostly
focus on the micro-level to demonstrate how exploitation is carried out on
social networks (mostly through surveillance and data mining).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Michael, I guess you’re
not talking about Marxist understanding of materialism in this case?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Best,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border-width:1pt medium medium;border-style:solid none none;border-color:rgb(181,196,223) currentColor currentColor;padding:3pt 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">From:</span></b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">
<a href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net</a>] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ekaterina
Petrovna<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 13, 2012 1:45 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Goddard Michael<br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a href="mailto:discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [ICTs-and-Society] relation between political economy of
the media and cultural studies<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">why Fiske would not be appropriate? While it is somewhat
outdated, he gave an excellent oveview, I think, of the relationship between
domination (and culture industries used for the purposes of indoctrination and
domination) and popular culture, where people engage in making culture
industries 'their own'. Engaging in a playful way on Facebook can be seen as an
art of making everyday life, and some instances of trickery on Facebook (like
numerous pictures making fun of Facebook as corporation) are an example of
excorporation (Fiske, 1989). The main point is that while political economy of
the media is very important, how users use the media in everyday life and what
they think of it, should also be taken into account. The problem with engaging
only with critical approach and political economy of the media is that the
focus becomes too much on the macro, ignoring the micro...Boyd's studies (2008,
2010), on the other hand, focus, for instance, only on the user, ignoring
totally the aspect of the bigger picture (as David Beer rightly pointed out in
one of his articles in 2008), - shouldn't we try to go somewhere in the middle?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am not familiar, I have to admit, with materialist
approaches towards the media, - could you, please, Michael, give me some
examples?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">best regards,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ekaterina Netchitailova (PhD student at Sheffield Hallam)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 10:21 AM, Goddard Michael <<a href="mailto:M.N.Goddard@salford.ac.uk" target="_blank">M.N.Goddard@salford.ac.uk</a>>
wrote:<u></u><u></u></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Hello,
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">While
in agreement with Ekaterina that a diversity of approaches, addressing ICTs and
their users on a number of scales, is desirable, I would question whether 1980s
cultural studies, especially in the work of Fiske is the best resource for this
diversity (Stuart Hall is a somewhat different case since he actually engaged
with information theory in such as a way as to leave something salvageable for
thinking ICTs at Matt Fuller has argued).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Other
productive lines of inquiry might include materialist media theories/media
archaeology, which while depoliticising in some instances, nevertheless
provides useful resources for a materialist account of media, media ecological
approaches of the post-Guattarian/Matt Fuller variety at least, that go well
beyond concerns with e-waste to engage with how specific media generate and
interact with a variety of milieux or, on a more pragmatic level some of the
approaches developed in the recent <i>Transgression 2.0 </i>collection which to
engage with network phenomena like the use of social media during the Arab
Spring but also problematise easy assumptions about what this
means.......interventions that in some cases might be understood as continuing
the perspecitves of autonomous Marxism and to strongly critique the more
normative Frankfurt School version of Marxist cultural critique that still
seems dominant in many political economy approaches.....just a few suggestions
for pre-conference discussion,<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Michael
Goddard<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Dr
Michael N Goddard <u></u><u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Lecturer
in Media Studies<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">School
of Media, Music and Performance<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">University
of Salford<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">MediaCityUk<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Salford<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">M50
2HE<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">UK<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Reviews
editor of <i>Studies in Eastern European Cinema</i> (SEEC)<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt">Co-Editor
of <i>Reverberations: Noise, Affect, Politics, </i>Continuum, 2012<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";font-size:10pt"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="text-align:center" class="MsoNormal" align="center">
<hr align="center" size="2" width="100%">
</div>
<div>
<p style="margin-bottom:12pt" class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">From:</span></b><span style="font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif""> <a href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net</a>
[<a href="mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net</a>]
on behalf of Ekaterina Petrovna [<a href="mailto:epetrovna@gmail.com" target="_blank">epetrovna@gmail.com</a>]<br>
<b>Sent:</b> 12 February 2012 21:21<br>
<b>To:</b> <a href="mailto:discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [ICTs-and-Society] relation between political economy of the
media and cultural studies</span><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hello,<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">by looking at the abstracts for the conference in May in
Uppsala, I see that the main focus so far is on the political economyc of media
(or critical studies of media), which is actually the topic of the conference,
but shouldn't we also look at the theme of the relationship between the
political economy of media (more, macro-context from studies so far) and
cultural studies (so, far, as Christian Fuchs rightly points out it has been
more 'celebratory cultural studies of media" (2011). However, by focusing on
both macro and micro at the same time and by incorporating such works as John
Fiske (1989), maybe we could have a new perspective on media studies today?
Fuchs (2008, 2010, 2011) proposes abolishment of capitalism (quite an old
proposition) or searching for alternative media. The question, however, is:
would the users of Facebook actually switch to anything else (the answer
is no...at least from my ethnographic studies) and shouldn't we look at
facebook itself for these kind of alternatives? After all, recent examples
(Arab Spring) show that facebook can be used effectively for organising popular
protests, - could Facebook be used for a good cause also in other cases? And
another question: by abolishing capitalism, - which society do you envision? <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Graham Murdock says: "where users labour in their
leisure time to boost corporate profits" (from paper abstract,
2012) by looking at the use of digital media. If we focus only on this
perspective, aren't we in danger of missing an important part of popular culture,
as elaborated by John Fiske (1989) and many others (Stuart Hall, etc)? The
problem with focusing only on marco context is that we can totally
misunderstand the perspective of the user (something which Christian Fuchs
discussed in one of the articles with Dwayne Winseck (2011). Users don't
consider that they work for free for facebook when they use it, - if anything
they have fun and engage in many ways in 'trickering' Facebook (by organising
many groups either against Facebook or by making fun of it, on Facebook
itself). Also what about the fact that many users use Facebook actually at work
(it was banned as a result in many workplaces, but the application to use
facebook through phones, somehow, overpassed this problem)? Isn't in some way a
kind of sabotage to capitalism in a trickery sort of way?<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p> <u></u><u></u></p>
<p>Ekaterina Netchitailova (PhD student at Sheffield Hallam)<u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p style="margin-bottom:12pt" class="MsoNormal"><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">Discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net</a><u></u><u></u></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
</div></div></div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Discussion mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net">Discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net" target="_blank">http://lists.icts-and-society.net/listinfo.cgi/discussion-icts-and-society.net</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br>