Fuchs
Ch. 4: Social Media and Communication Power & Fuchs Ch. 8: Twitter and
Democracy: A New Public Sphere?
I
believe Chapter 4 would have to be one of my favorite readings thus far, as it
touched on a variety of topics and had strong critiques that I believe made
logical sense, at least in terms of Castells’s theory.
Castell
argues that social media communication is mass self-communication and that its
emergence has dramatically shifted the power structure of society. However,
based on the Writing on the Wall, I
would argue that, though social media is
a form of mass self-communication, it is not its first appearance. One of my
takeaways from Writing on the Wall
was that there have been a number of forms of mass communication, including
mass self-communication, throughout the ages, even if they have not been
traditionally labeled or considered as such. I would also agree that its
emergence may have shifted the power structure of society, but I do not see that
shift as dramatically as Castell seems to imply. Though people have more access
now, that only applies for some people, and their usage of social media does
not necessarily indicate that the power structure has shifted – reference, for
instance, the section on page 85 that deals with empirical research.
Interpersonal communication and traditional media were far more important to
the social movements than social media, so the question is begged, If social
media, which has the potential to shift the structure of power, is not used for
that purpose, has it really shifted society’s power structure?
I
found this question as having a direct link to the reading in Chapter 8
regarding Twitter. While it does have amazing potential, so many things do –
but they are not used to fulfill that potential. Twitter, which might have
become a public sphere by Fuch’s ideal, was instead overrun by entertainment
tweets and is largely controlled by the content created by verified,
revenue-generating accounts. However, this leads me to another question – what
would be the potential of a Twitter-like website designed in a non-capitalist
environment? Is the problem with Twitter that Americans (and other users of the
site) are too focused on entertainment and ignoring widespread, global
problems? Or is the problem, at its root, that Twitter is a business whose end
goal is to make a profit? It seems like a societal issue, but we can compare
Twitter to Weibo, where friends of mine have said just how much political
dissent occurs, albeit in a very indirect and “concealed” manner – are Weibo
users more concerned with political issues, while Americans are more able to
ignore them because they do not seem to affect so much of the internet-accessing
population at large? I would be curious to see some of these points more
belabored.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.