<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii"> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">  <style>  </style>  </head> <body lang=SL link=blue vlink=purple> <div class=Section1> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>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).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>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).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>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.<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>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).<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>Michael, I guess you’re not talking about Marxist understanding of materialism in this case?<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span lang=EN-US style='color:black'>Best,<o:p></o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='color:black'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'> <p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net [mailto:discussion-bounces@lists.icts-and-society.net] <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> discussion@lists.icts-and-society.net<br> <b>Subject:</b> Re: [ICTs-and-Society] relation between political economy of the media and cultural studies<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>Hello,<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></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?<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></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?<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>best regards,<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>Ekaterina Netchitailova (PhD student at Sheffield Hallam)<o:p></o:p></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">M.N.Goddard@salford.ac.uk</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p> <div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Hello, <o:p></o:p></span></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>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).<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>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,<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Michael Goddard<o:p></o:p></span></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Dr Michael N Goddard <o:p></o:p></span></p> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Lecturer in Media Studies<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>School of Media, Music and Performance<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>University of Salford<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>MediaCityUk<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Salford<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>M50 2HE<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>UK<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Reviews editor of <i>Studies in Eastern European Cinema</i> (SEEC)<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>Co-Editor of <i>Reverberations: Noise, Affect, Politics, </i>Continuum, 2012<o:p></o:p></span></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'><o:p> </o:p></span></p> </div> </div> </div> <div> <div class=MsoNormal align=center style='text-align:center'> <hr size=2 width="100%" align=center> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'>From:</span></b><span style='font-family: "Tahoma","sans-serif";color:black'> <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><o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <div> <div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal>Hello,<o:p></o:p></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? <o:p></o:p></p> </div> <div> <p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></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?<o:p></o:p></p> </div> <p> <o:p></o:p></p> <p>Ekaterina Netchitailova (PhD student at Sheffield Hallam)<o:p></o:p></p> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><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><o:p></o:p></p> </div> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p> </div> </body> </html>