Lily Kronfeld's Socratic Dialogue

Fuchs: Is contemporary social media truly participatory?

Jenkins: Before I engage in this interesting question I would like to define some terms. First,  “participatory culture” is a culture by which fans and other consumers are invited to actively participate in the creation and circulation of new content. Thus, participation involves collaboration. By combining resources and skills, a collective intelligence forms as a source of media power.

Fuchs: Hmm, is that so? Go on…

Jenkins: More so, “participatory culture” has relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civil engagement. It also has strong support for creating and sharing creations with others. There is an informal mentorship that passes along experience. It is composed of members who share special social connections with one another and by those who believe their contributions matter.

Fuchs: You have it all wrong Jenkins! “Participatory culture” is simply a false ideology. Rather, a truly participatory media democracy must be an ownership democracy. As opposed to participatory democracy, participatory culture is a rather naive concept mainly created by “white boys who love their toys.”

Jenkins: Don’ t mock me Fuchs!

Fuchs: But really though, I’ve taken the time to analyze the downsides of the internet such as economic crisis, exploitation of users, concerns about privacy violations and surveillance… While you may think participation means that humans meet online, form collectives, create and share content, this does not uphold in capitalist infrastructure. It seems to me Jenkins that you only have a culturalistic understanding of participation. You ignore the notion of participatory democracy, a term which has political, political economic and cultural dimensions. Your definition and use of the term “participatory culture,” ignores aspects of participatory democracy. You cannot overlook questions about the ownership of platforms, collective decision-making, profit, class and distribution of material benefits. It is imperative that you acknowledge the significance of ownership!

Jenkins: I believe in collective intelligence, networking and marketing. I believe that participatory culture is relative and we unfortunately do not live in a society where everyone is able to participate. Exclusion is a natural feature of contemporary society. I’m not dismissing the concept of ownership; rather I acknowledge the importance of corporate responsibility and greater diversity of opinion. I am most definitely concerned by the ownership of mainstream commercial media. My understanding of “participatory culture” is mainly about expressions, engagement, creation, sharing, experience, contributions and feelings.

Fuchs:  Such lofty ideals you have Jenkins! While you argue that participatory culture advances cultural diversity, you overlook that not all voices have the same power and that produced content and voices are frequently marginalized because visibility is a vital resource in contemporary culture. Likewise, you disregard the notion that all of these practices are enabled by capital accumulation. Jenkins my friend, your reductionist understanding of culture ignores the contemporary political economy. You cannot ignore the fundamental principles behind participatory democracy.

Jenkins: “An Internet that is dominated by corporations that accumulate capital by exploiting and commodifying users can in the theory of participatory democracy never be participatory.” Thus, its cultural expression cannot be an expression of participation. I suggest companies establish stronger connections with their constituencies and consumers.

Fuchs: Do not be so ignorant to reduce the notion of participation to a cultural dimension. You cannot disregard the extensive notion of participatory democracy and its implications for the Internet. It is wrong to neglect ownership as an aspect of participation. You pay no attention to aspects of class and capitalism. Secondly, you mistakenly assume an automatic connection between fandom in popular culture and political protest. You also mistake politics with popular culture.

Jenkins: In truth, my account of participatory culture and social media as producers of participatory culture is a form of cultural reductionism and determinism. Yes, I do neglect structural constraints of human behavior and the debate regarding structure and agency.

Fuchs: You miss the central economic relevance of money in the economy. It is incorrect to argue that the exploitation of users’ digital labor is not really a problem if they have social benefits from platform usage.

Jenkins: Media makes society and culture more democratic through the “wiring of humanity and economic democracy.” You see, media is spreadable, meaning consumers are grassroot advocates for materials, which are socially and personally meaningful to them. The constructs of capitalism greatly shape the creation and circulation of media. Capitalism organizes society in such a way that exploitation is a necessary reality for a certain portion of the population.

Fuchs: Contemporary social media are not participatory. Large companies that marginalize politics dominate the media. While you celebrate the democratic potentials of social media, you neglect aspects of capitalism. Thus, these kinds of assumptions are ideologies that reinforce capitalist domination. The existence of digital media is based on various forms of labor and different degrees of exploitation. Commercial social media are full of exploitation as they are objects of ideological mystifications. You see, these idealizations of social media detract attention from class and advance the attraction of investors. Therefore, the creation and expansion of such spheres supports capital accumulation. A moral value of capitalism is economic value. How can you ignore this? To reiterate, I believe in social media as an ideology. There are inherent limits of participatory social media.  Jenkins, approaches like yours miss a theoretically grounded understanding of participation. Although you make claims about implications for democracy, you fail to understand its proper function.