Media technology and the transformation of the public sphere: a media social ecology perspective' - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 17
About This Presentation
Title:

Media technology and the transformation of the public sphere: a media social ecology perspective'

Description:

This happens as new communication technologies possess unique qualities not ... Technology will change society in a desired direction; ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:153
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 18
Provided by: colegyd
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Media technology and the transformation of the public sphere: a media social ecology perspective'


1
Media technology and the transformation of the
public sphere a media / social ecology
perspective.
  • Dr Marcus Leaning
  • University of Winchester

2
Introduction
  • Media ecology - a useful but slightly
    inappropriately used term - perhaps social
    ecology would be better?
  • Whichever, it provides a interesting device
    through which we can examine the role of
    technology in delivering social change.
  • Thus when seeking to develop strategies for the
    revival of the PS, media / social ecology seems
    an important but underused perspective.

3
The public sphere
  • A historical anomaly caused by a convergence of
    social and technical phenomenon
  • Emergence of bourgeois capitalism
  • New composite social class - mercantile class
    bits of royal court
  • Mass circulation media (pamphlets and
    newspapers)
  • Facilitated a new form of political identity.
  • Came into being in a particular historical
    situation and damaged by the same processes that
    facilitated it.

4
All is woeThe public sphere in trouble
  • Inevitable trajectory of the very processes that
    gave rise to the public sphere contributed to its
    transformation
  • Capitalism -
  • Extension of state interests
  • (re)feudalisation of communicative space
  • Plus challenges to its legitimacy by new politics
    and NSMs

5
The Rebirth argument
  • New technologies seen as a means by which it can
    be recovered, restored or revitalised.
  • This happens as new communication technologies
    possess unique qualities not present in mass
    media forms
  • Interactivity
  • User production of content
  • Individualised consumption of media
  • Peer-communication.

6
Technological salvation of the public sphere
  • These characteristics of new media means it
    challenges the monopolization of media by
    corporate enterprises and state intervention.
  • They allow new channels by which citizens are
    able to communicate and be political outside of
    the the corporate and state world(s).

7
New media to the rescue
  • A popular position (for researchers).
  • New mediawill undo the damage done to politics
    by the old media. Far from the telescreen
    dystopias, new media technology hails a rebirth
    of democratic life. It is envisaged that new
    public spheres will open up and that technologies
    will permit social actors to find or forge common
    political interests. People will actively access
    information from an infinite, free virtual
    library rather than receiving half-digested
    programing, and interactive media will
    institutionalise a right to reply. (Bryan et al,
    1998 5).
  • Blogs will do similar ( Blood, 2002 Colville,
    2008 Gilmor, 2006 Kline, 2005 Hewitt, 2006
    Scott-Hall, 2006)
  • A few critical voices as well (Barlow, 2007
    Froomkin, 2003 Ò Baoill, 2005).

8
Technology and change
  • Embedded in such accounts is a view of the
    relationship of technology to society and social
    change
  • Technology is outside of society but operant
    upon it causing discrete effects
  • Technology will change society in a desired
    direction
  • Technology is the dominant driver or facilitator
    of change - technology will change social life.

9
Criticism(s)
  • Big problems with this account
  • Theoretical - Williams (1974), Leaning (2005,
    2009) - technology part of society - relationship
    far more complex.
  • Empirical studies reveal problems of
    technological lead development - not viable or
    sustainable.
  • Ethical - imposed, external, pro-poor,
    paternal.

10
What to do?
  • Can technology be used?
  • A richer approach is needed, one that goes
    beyond the technological.
  • Local, small-scale NGO who (somewhat
    problematically) offer an interesting case study.
  • When conceptualized with social / media ecology
    perspective their work appears very interesting.

11
Cross cultural dialogue
  • The NGO works in encouraging cross cultural
    dialogue and inter-faith communication.
  • Drew upon funding from a variety of sources to
    meet political and other agenda.
  • Aim to facilitate cross-cultural understanding.
  • Run projects and workshops to do this activity.

12
Project based not technology based
  • Started making use of a number of media platforms
    to both facilitate this activity and as a focus
    for projects.
  • The technology or platform was always additional
    to and subject to the larger projects.
  • While useful technology could only ever be part
    of the solution.

13
Small, but beautiful.
  • Small scale but very effective.
  • NGO engaged in the very activity of facilitating
    a public sphere(s), the establishment of
    discourse ethics and citizenship development.
  • Their work involved a range of activities, only
    some of which were media technology centric.

14
Social / media ecology perspective
  • Media technology is not the engine of change but
    one component in an toolkit that was used to
    advance the desired change.
  • Other key elements were
  • An approach to work in sympathy with local
    social practices
  • Development of grass roots projects - NGO worked
    with (rather than around) communities recruit
    and train locals
  • Extensive live and face to face contact
    training sessions, workshops, mentoring plus
    other techniques.
  • Aftercare - follow up.
  • Not event but a process.

15
Technology alone is not enough
  • For this agency technology was not enough.
  • It requires extensive support and localisation.
  • These are aspects often missed or worse ignored
  • Not sexy
  • Expensive! People cost lots
  • Non discrete require support - projects are
    long term.

16
Narrow but deep change
  • Activity can be understood as a narrow but deep,
    long term engagement rather than a broad quick
    fix.
  • Recipients of the activities became more engaged
    and involved with community activities virtuous
    circle.
  • Transformational of people, development of active
    citizenship.

17
Recommendations
  • Holistic approach
  • technology just one of a basket of measures
    used
  • has to matched and integrated within extensive
    social (human) activities, citizenship
    development initiatives
  • Transformative approaches should be socially lead
    -
  • Driven by local or grass roots level requirements
    and ideally in partnership with local agents.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com