articles...
autonomy to automany
May 1, 04:08 PM · Susan Agnew
In the streets and in our homes we are bombarded by advertisements aiming to win our loyalty. The language of advertising guides the viewer to attach signified messages to recognised signifiers. Sophisticated techniques are employed and a lot of money invested to cement positive feelings toward brands (Nome, 2007).
Brand icons and advertising images correspond to Baudrillard’s simulacrum as they are not representative; they bear no relation to reality (Baudrillard, 1994, p.6). In such a situation what are we consuming?
Nome argues that brand identities form a fictional “other” that we relate to and compare ourselves with. The brands that we consume and exhibit influence our identities by saying something about who we are (Nome, 2007). As such, the consumption of brands is a way of relating with each other and not the products we buy. Personal objects act as connective signifiers in a culture of simulation.
It seems that the individual is overshadowed by giant economic powers and attempts to stand alone make us more vulnerable (Adorno and Horkheimer, 1997, p.xiv). In the glare of mass media it is difficult to make informed and independent decisions about our purchases.
Trust in corporations is often based on image that obscures actions, but what becomes of positive actions identified by icons?
Marilyn Friedman argues that we can resist social influences, even those which are constitutive of our identities (Friedman, 1993, p.79). This potential lies in the complexity of our identities and social networks. We are able to move across disparate parts of ourselves, drawing on different capacities developed in multiple social contexts (Friedman, 1993, p.76). Distrust and doubt act as the vehicle of this mobility.
References:
Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (1972) Dialectic of Enlightenment, New York:Herder & Herder
Baudrillard. J. (1994) Simulacra and Simulation, Michigan, USA: The University of Michigan Press.
Friedman, M. (1993), What Are Friends For?, New York: Cornell University Press
Nome, D. (2007) Culture Jamming http://www.anthrobase.com/txt/N/Nome_D_01.htm last accessed 04.05.07
Finally, for whom is the internet?
May 1, 03:42 PM · Eugenia Tragaki
Unsatisfied governments, furtive businessmen, visionary scientists, intelligent hackers, repressed feminists, bratish teenagers, or naive common users; they all have found their place into this wonderland that is called: cyberspace.
Firstly, the cyber-nerds or cyberpunks: the hackers. Antisocial young men and as D.Lupton illustrates: “spectacularly physical inattractive: wearing thick, unflattering spectacles, overweight, pale,pimply skin, poor fashion sense” (Lupton, 1995:481). The hackers created an underground cyber-community by showing their skills in cracking, writing and manipulating the digital language (Marshall, 2004b:50, Watson, 2003:251). They refer to an endless battle between the human versus the machine intelligence (Roszak, 1986:36). They started as “enemies of the state” but they ended as “amateur” scientists who work for informational revolution’s sake (Ross, 1991: 254-266).
On the other hand, there were the cyber-feminists a new feministic clique which found in this abstract cyber-world an opportunity to break the barriers of the partiarchic reality (Robins, 1996: 82). They imagined a “post-gender world” with no boundaries, where “transsezual” “humanoid hybrids” would replace their repressed material existence (Haraway, 1991:291-316, Springer, 1996: 339, Stryker, 1995:588-596).
Then again, there were a gereration of cyber-teens or childish adults, who found a new way to entertain themselves, in order to escape from the boring passive games and their common lives. The interaction and the adrenaline that the electronic games offered them, created a new addiction (Butler, 2004:47-48, Haddon, 2003: 322, Marshall, 2004b:61-74, Maeshall, 2004a:73, Robins, 1996:92).
Off course, above all are the capitalistic goverments and the voracious industries that use cyberspace in order to realize their imperialistic plans (Ang, 2003:368, Golding, 2002: 804-806, Marshall, 2004b:57, Marshall, 2004a:70,78).
Lastly, under all these profiles are lying all the others. Artists, teachers, students, employees and parents, we are the others who are feeding the cyber-lion. The reasons we choose to accomodate cyberspace are umpteen. But as long as we choose it and as we cannot longer escape from it, at least we could try to enjoy it, as much as we can.
References:
Ang I.(2003)_In the realm of incertainty: the global village and capitalist postmodernity_, in Mackay H.&O’Sallivan T.(eds.),The Media Reader:continuity and transformation,London, California, New Delhi: SAGE
Butler J.(2004)_The Internet and the WorldWideWeb_, in Harries D.(ed.)_The New Media Book_, London:BFI
Golding P.(2002)_Worldwide Wedge_, in Marris P.&Thornham S.(eds), Media Studies: a reader, Edinburgh: Edinburg Press
Haddon L.(2003)_The development of interactive games_, in Mackay H.&O’Sallivan T.(eds.),The Media Reader:continuity and transformation,London, California, New Delhi: SAGE
Haraway D.(1991)_A cyborg Manifesto_, in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Lupton D.(1995)_The Embodied Computer/user, in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Marshall D.(2004a)_The New Intertextual Commodity_,in Harries D.(ed.)_The New Media Book_, London:BFI
Marshall D.(2004b)_New Media Cultures_,London:Arnold
Robins K.(1996)_Cyberspace and the World we Live in_,in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Ross A.(1991)_Hacking Away at the Counter-Culture_,in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Roszak T.(1986)_The Cult of Information_,Cambridge:Lutterworth
Springer C.(1996)_Digital Rage_,in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Stryker S.(1995),Transsexuality:the postmodern body and.as technology,in Bell D.&Kennedy B.(eds.)(2002),The Cybercultures reader,London,New York: Routledge
Watson J.(2003),Media Communication: an introduction to theory and process, Hampshire, NewYork:Palgrave MacMillan
all the images (exept the first one) are David Ho’s
World Wide Divide
Apr 30, 09:20 PM · Eugenia Tragaki
When we talk about new media and internet as the key form of global telecommunication, then we need to consider how accessible and utile is for the average world. For tasting the advantages that Net gives you, firstly you need to afford the proper provision (electricity, phone line, broadband connection, computer,modem etc.) (Golding, 2003:808). However, these essential supplies are considered as luxuries by the lower social classes or by the poorest developing countries and according to the statistics, by the most of the world (Internet Usage Statistics, 2007, Morgan Stanley, 2005). This is the so-called digital divide (Golding, 2003:802, Marshall, 2004:35, Watson, 2003:253).
In the 1999 the UN Development Program , identified this inequality by stating that ‘while the internet provided enormous benefits to some people, others are being left behind’ (BBC, 1999a, Jung et al., 2001). Additionally, most of the tech-theorists have been covered this issue as an already known thorn of the previous media inventions (Goling, 2003:814, Marshall, 2004:42, Watson, 2003:224). It seems that the term WorldWideWeb user refers mostly to the Western white,young,wealthy and educated man (Watson, 2003:196,200).
Moreover, as the economical and political power goes hand by hand, then this digital divide is more likely to cause social (class,gender), national and international exclusion (Goling, 2003:810, Marshall, 2004:42, Watson, 2003:200-227). It is all about power and control. The internet as a tool for globalization, under the illusion of a liberal e-democracy, made clearer the Western tension for imperialistic industrialization of the developing countries (Watson, 2003:200)
On the other hand, a lot of ‘well-wisher’ organizations had tried to bridge the gap by running charities or campaigns in order to enhance the use of the internet. But we need to consider if this inequality worths to be equalized. Considering the disadvantages of the technological addiction; the lack of social and physical activity or the malicious surveillance, it is hard to support a bridging the gap project. Then I will probably agree with R. Mugabe when he claims that: “Digital technology was being used by some to dominate the world” (BBC/Doyle, 2003). However, I will also agree with the notion of providing equality in choice, as K.Anan maintained (BBC,1999b).
References:
BBC (1999a),Internet increases global inequality-UN, source: BBC News, online at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/392171.stm (2007)
BBC(1999b),Bridging the Digital Divide,source: BBC News, online at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/special_report/1999/10/99/information_rich_information_poor/466651.stm (2007)
Doyle M.(2003),Mugabe slams ‘global inequality’,source:BBC News, online at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3303129.stm (2007)
Goling P.(2003),Worldwide Wedge:division and contradiction in the global information infrastructure, in Marris P.&Thornham S.,Media Studies:a reader (2nd ed.),Edinburgh:Edinburgh Univ.Press
Marshall P.D.(2004),New Media Cultures,London:Arnold
Watson J.(2003),Media Communication:an introduction to theory and process(2nd.ed),Hampshire,NewYork:Pargrave MacMillan
Comment [2]
Online piracy kills or saves new media?
Apr 29, 08:42 PM · Eugenia Tragaki
The new technology and mostly the internet, opened a new spectrum in the way we access, receive, use, save or share information. The shift from the atom to the bits as N.Negroponte had indentified, changed the way that information is transferred and manipulated (Douglas, 2004:88). In terms of this change the digitalized information is considered more accessible and abstract than the physical one. Thus, the issue of ownership as “the concrete possession of an item” is no longer considered as such (Douglas, 2004:88, Marshall, 2004: 49).
The openness and freedom in the flow of information had raised issues about its ownership which grew a threat over the so called intellectual piracy via the Net (Douglas, 2004:82, Marshall, 2004: 60). Through an online peer-to-peer file sharing or though the storing and copying by a range of digital devices, the file piracy is more likely to be practiced. Software like Napster, Kazaa, Morpheus etc. gives you the opportunity to download files, just for free (Douglas, 2004:86, Marshall, 2004: 50,59). This kind of piracy has being opposed by artists and cultural industries by claiming that it ‘kills’ art, creativity and culture (Panethiere, 2005, RIAA, 2003).
However, online piracy is not referred as the unauthorized reproduction of ideas or creative artefacts;moreover it is referred as a financial loss (Douglas, 2004:85). Therefore, the problem is not that artistic labour is being stolen. The problem seems to be that the cultural industries lose their money and thus their power into the capitalistic arena. But considering J.Parikka’s point about the ‘replication of capitalism’, the act of the online piracy does not harm, it only shifts the capitalistic production flow (Parikka, 2005, Marshall, 2004:60).
As cultural industries are losing clients, however, internet providers and computer industries are gaining more.
References:
Douglas T.(2004),Innovation, Piracy and the Ethos of New Media, in Harries D.(ed.),The New Media Book,London: B.F.I.
Marshall D.P.(2004),New Media Cultures, London:Arnold
Panethiere D.(2005),The Persistence of Piracy:The Consequences for Creativity, for Culture and for Sustainavle Development, London, Paris:UNESCO, online at: http://portal.unesco.org/culture/es/file_download.php/96a6b61f31ebfa43fd4aee3b47ac69fcpiracy_e.pdf (2007)
Parikka J.(2005), Digital Monsters, Binary Aliens-Computer Wiruses, Capitalism and the Flow of Information, source: journal.fibreculture.org, online at: http://journal.fibreculture.org/issue4/issue4_parikka.html (2007)
Recording Industry Association of America(2003),Online Piracy and Electronic Theft, source: www.riaa.com, online at: http://www.riaa.com/issues/piracy/online.asp (2007)
Internet surveillance: a conspiracy scenario or the truth behind the wires?
Apr 28, 09:54 PM · Eugenia Tragaki
Using internet you might feel that you are the ‘god of your private world’ (Robins, 2002:77). Maybe it is time to know that you are not alone out there; someone is watching you for “control revolution’s” sake (Lyon, 2003:363). It is time to learn about the internet surveillance, which breaks the myths of internet’s anonymity and indefinability.As we belong to a capitalistic society we are aware that we have a record in goverment’s files, which certifies our existence. Goverments use this kind of recording in order to control their citizens (Lyon, 2003:354, Roszak, 1986:182).
On the internet it seems that surveillance has become more serious. The fear of terrorism and cyber-crime had forced goverments (US,UK) to use programs like Carnivore or Echelon in order to track suspects through an “internet-tapping system” (Watson, 2003:245). Additionally, some private companies use to monitor the websurfing of their employees for supervision and surveillance. In some cases that lead into useful results, like the arrestment of pedophiles (Lyon, 2003:357).
However, this eavesdropping refers to all communal internet users, by affecting their online privacy. If you use the World Wide Web and you have an e-mail or a personal account in an online service, then it is likely to leave trails of your personal details. Hence, you are being recorded (Lyon, 2003:358, Privacy International, 2007). The problem starts when your personal data are being used without your permission, for example for marketing purposes. This happens through the ISP’s black boxes, cookies , spyware, or bugs that some websides use for marking and tracing their users. These tracking programs form the user’s ‘online profile’, which is used for monitoring their preferences, interests and thus their consuming needs (Privacy International, 2007).
But do not panic. There are some tools available for protection against surveillance, like Encryption ect. (Privacy International, 2007). However, you need to remember that you cannot escape being a susceprible piece of the world’s commercial and political arena (Roszak, 1986:186).
References
Lyon D. (2003), The world wide wed of surveillance: the internet and off-world power flows, in Mackay H. & O’Sallivan T.(eds), The media reader: continuity and transformation, London, California, New Delhi:SAGE
Privacy International (2007), source: privacyinternational.org, online at: http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2000/threats.html
Robins K. (2002), Cyberspace and the world we live in, in Bell D. & Kennedy B. (eds), The Cybercultures reader,London, New York: Routledge
Roszak T. (1986), The cult if information, Cambridge: Lutterworth
Watson J. (2003),Media Communication: an introduction to theory and process(2nd ed.), New York:Palgrave MacMillan