Sign in or 
Share this
Guiding Insights
a work in progress ...
Theoretical Propositions of Media Ecology (from Lum 2006: 32-33)
1. "communication media are not neutral, transparent, or value-free conduits for carrying data or information ... media's intrinsic physical structure and symbolic form plays a defining role in shaping what and how information is to be encoded and transmitted and therefore how it is to be decoded."
2. all media are "biased" From Nystrom we know the following biases:
3. These biases can "facilitate various psychic or perceptual, social, economic, political, and cultural consequences."
Media are environments.
We do not stand outside of our media and simply "use them." We are engaged in media environments.
Multi-media environments cannot be understood by "adding up" the effects of each medium by itself.
As Lum notes, "we cannot conceptualize the Internet as one part writing, one part (still and moving) image, one part sound, one part computer, one part telephone, and so on; instead, it is a unique symbolic environment whose complex new languages, as Carpenter(1960) would have suggested, has yet to be deciphered" (2006:31).
Many studies of media ecology look for effects on individuals. There are many problems with this:
Social and cultural environments can be understood as media as well.
social settings are "complex, multimedia symbolic environments" each with "a unique set of vocabulary and rules that define what its inhabitants do and how they interact with everything else outside of the confines of this environment" (Lum 2006:31). Goffman is important here.
vs. Technological Determinism: Ong's Relationalist Perspective
must pay attention to the ways communications technologies are interrelated with (but do not determine) economic, social, political and intellectual structures and practices (Ong 1988:701). Understanding these interrelationships requires a nuanced understanding of cultural dynamics, communication, and mediation. Cultures cannot be taken as simple and monolithic structures but as complex, dynamic, and heterogeneous systems of practice, negotiated and continuously re-invented by humans with their own (culturally informed) agendas and biases (see Bourdieu 1977; Fischer 2007). The same can also be said for technology. Technologies simply do not exist apart from the techniques employed in their use (Strate 2006). Technologies should not be understood as simple physical objects, but as dynamic heterogeneous systems of practice involved in cycles of continuous re-invention.
"The Medium is the Message"
"The Medium is the Massage"
Goffman add defnitions of framing, fronting, facework, staging, etc. ...
Multiple Identities
Theoretical Propositions of Media Ecology (from Lum 2006: 32-33)
1. "communication media are not neutral, transparent, or value-free conduits for carrying data or information ... media's intrinsic physical structure and symbolic form plays a defining role in shaping what and how information is to be encoded and transmitted and therefore how it is to be decoded."
2. all media are "biased" From Nystrom we know the following biases:
- intellectual and emotional biases based on symoblic forms
- spatial, temporal, and sensory biases based on physical structure
- political biases based on accessibility of symbolic forms
- social biases based on different types of social situations created by physical form
- metaphysical biases due to the way they organize time and space
- content biases based on symbolic and physical forms
- all of this adds up to different epistemological biases
3. These biases can "facilitate various psychic or perceptual, social, economic, political, and cultural consequences."
Media are environments.
We do not stand outside of our media and simply "use them." We are engaged in media environments.
Multi-media environments cannot be understood by "adding up" the effects of each medium by itself.
As Lum notes, "we cannot conceptualize the Internet as one part writing, one part (still and moving) image, one part sound, one part computer, one part telephone, and so on; instead, it is a unique symbolic environment whose complex new languages, as Carpenter(1960) would have suggested, has yet to be deciphered" (2006:31).
Many studies of media ecology look for effects on individuals. There are many problems with this:
- overlooks social and cultural contexts
- falsely imagines cognition to be purely individual and material, not social and intersubjective
- focus on psychological overlooks economic, political, and ideological factors
Social and cultural environments can be understood as media as well.
social settings are "complex, multimedia symbolic environments" each with "a unique set of vocabulary and rules that define what its inhabitants do and how they interact with everything else outside of the confines of this environment" (Lum 2006:31). Goffman is important here.
vs. Technological Determinism: Ong's Relationalist Perspective
must pay attention to the ways communications technologies are interrelated with (but do not determine) economic, social, political and intellectual structures and practices (Ong 1988:701). Understanding these interrelationships requires a nuanced understanding of cultural dynamics, communication, and mediation. Cultures cannot be taken as simple and monolithic structures but as complex, dynamic, and heterogeneous systems of practice, negotiated and continuously re-invented by humans with their own (culturally informed) agendas and biases (see Bourdieu 1977; Fischer 2007). The same can also be said for technology. Technologies simply do not exist apart from the techniques employed in their use (Strate 2006). Technologies should not be understood as simple physical objects, but as dynamic heterogeneous systems of practice involved in cycles of continuous re-invention.
"The Medium is the Message"
"The Medium is the Massage"
Goffman add defnitions of framing, fronting, facework, staging, etc. ...
Multiple Identities
mwesch |
Latest page update: made by mwesch
, Dec 30 2008, 3:12 PM EST
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by mwesch
128 words deleted view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
None
More Info: links to this page
|
| Started By | Thread Subject | Replies | Last Post | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anotherqueerjubu | Studies of media ecology and economic factors | 0 | Mar 24 2008, 5:42 PM EDT by Anotherqueerjubu | ||
|
Thread started: Mar 24 2008, 5:42 PM EDT
Watch
While it may be true that within the academic community that studies of media ecology overlook economic factors, I would submit that there are hundreds of people in my industry — advertising and direct marketing — that consider this on an ongoing basis in the service of selling. Meanwhile, market analysts consider the economic factors of media ecology as they rate investing in Google versus The New York Times Company. Perhaps I misunderstand your use of terminology since this is the academic world. However the business world is certainly looking at how the economics of the media environment are changing due to rapidly shifting media usage. Academic studies of media ecology may overlook political implications but I am certain that political research firms have written a lot about this. Of course, it would be proprietary information, something there is less and less of in the new digital world. Which makes it all the more valuable.
|
|||||
Showing 1 of 1 threads for this page
