8. Participatory culture

 

Participatory culture is generally a concept that involves the participation of users, audiences, consumers etc. in creating a culture. For Henry Jenkins, who has been developing the notion of participatory culture in web 2.0 emphasize the web 2.0 as spreadable media that involves user’s active shaping of the content that led culture to be a participatory one.

Jenkins defines participatory culture as culture “in which fans and other consumers are invited to actively participate in the creation and circulation of new content”” (Fuchs, p.54)

There are 5 points that Jenkins defines participatory culture with

  1. relatively low barriers to artistic expression and civic engagement,
  2. strong support for creating and sharing creations with others,
  3. some type of informal mentorship whereby what is known by the most experienced is passed along to novices,
  4. members who believe that their contributions matter, and
  5. members who feel some degree of social connection with one another

(Fuchs, 2014, p. 54)

Fuchs (2014) however, holds a very negative and critical view on Jenkins’ theory of participatory culture. He criticizes Jenkins of being overly optimistic on the issue. Fuchs also suspect that Jenkins positivity might be due to that his research is being funded. There are four main points of critique by Fuchs (2014) towards Jenkins’ theory.

First that Jenkins reduces the notion of participatory culture into a cultural notion which Fuchs strongly disagrees with. A problem of the “participatory culture” – it is a term that highly connected to the participatory democracy theory. As Fuchs (2014) suggest that one should use “participatory culture” in relation to participatory democracy theory to avoid the vulgar use of it. He criticizes Jenkins definition of participatory culture which ignores the aspect of democracy.

The second point criticizes the idealized view of fan culture in Jenkins theory. As Jenkins mistakenly made a link between fandom culture and political actions. With this Jenkins also have a mistaken view of politics by seeing it as micro politics within popular culture. The example, Fuchs suggests that fandom in popular culture is not what starting or motivate a political action, for instance, a political protest. Popular culture and fandom are involved in politics more as a medium to spread and support. However, for the real political actions, it is exercised by the political activists and not the fan community.

The third point Fuchs regards Jenkins theory of participatory culture as a theory of reductionism and determinism. Jenkins theory is reductionist in many aspects. It mainly all come back to the critique that the theory reduces the understanding the aspects of the social media and the world into the cultural dimension. In this, it ignores the political dimension that is very important for Fuchs.

The last main point is that  Jenkins made a flawed assertion that exploitation of users’ digital labor is not a problem as they have social benefits from platform usage.

The ownership dimension of platforms is also being neglected. The large social platforms that own by large companies mediate the cultural expression of the internet user (p. 56) Users or employees are excluded from the decision making of it.

Some other points of criticism by Van Dijck & Nieborg (2009) will also be discussed and show how those link to Fuchs’ criticism.

Van Dijck & Nieborg (2009)  criticism of Jenkins’ theory of participatory culture is that Jenkins works is replicating the cooperate discourse that is first found in the business sector. That Jenkins model is not a new or more critical model. But the fact is that Jenkins aimed to develop his theory for the business use, and therefore the criticism by VanDijk is rather unconvincing.

On the criticism of users, Van Dijck & Nieborg (2009) criticize Jenkins disregards the significance of a large amount passive spectators on the internet and a relatively small percentage of active creators even though Jenkins knows that not all users are equally active.

Van Dijck & Nieborg (2009) also made some critiques that related to Jenkins and Fuchs critiques. Similar to Fuchs, Van Dijck also criticizes Jenkins’ belief in communal action and collection intelligence as that belief made his argument to override the aspect on political economy.

To conclude, while Jenkins’ cultural theory of the detailed notion of  participatory culture includes the acknowledging of the relevance of economic and ideological interests in social media,  his ignores or avoidance of political culture/ theory led to much criticize from different authors.

Reference List:

Fuchs, C. (2014) Social Media: A Critical Introduction. London: Sage. (chapter 3)
Van Dijck, J., & Nieborg, D. (2009). Wikinomics and its Discontents: A Critical Analysis of Web 2.0 Business Manifestos. New Media & Society, 11(5), 855-874.

 

6. Persuasion and Rhetoric

Persuasion and rhetoric have its long history date back to Plato and Aristotle. In the two literatures Simons (2001) and Sonesson (2013) introduce us to the many different approaches and theories of persuasion and rhetoric developed through history.

Persuasion according to Simons (2001) is the “human communication designed to influence the autonomous judgments and actions of others.” (p.?) With the intent to persuade and use of communication, persuasion attempt to influence who others think, feel or act. Simons (2001) disguises 3 ways to influence others and indicate that persuasion is different from the 2 other forms (inducement and coercion) to influence. And indicate the persuasion differs in that “persuasion predisposes other, but does not impose.” (p.8) Simons emphasis persuasion as a practice, whether it succeeds or fails still account for a practice of persuasion. The study of persuasion is called rhetoric academically.

Plato considers rhetoric as the art of persuasion and discussed whether such is a corrupted art.For Plato and Aristotle rhetoric is linked to truth. Plato proposes that truth and persuasion, always lies in two different domains so that that can be no truth in persuasion. His student, Aristotle, however, defended persuasion as persuasion can be used in deceiving people, but as the same time it can also be used to communicate truth.

It is important that persuasion deals with matters of judgment rather than certainty. Persuasion requires communication work in two ways, with a persusader and a persuadee. Sonesson mentioned 2 people who renovated rhetoric as the theory of persuasion. There is Chaim Perelam (1977) as an attempt to get other to adhere to one’s propositions (p.8). Groupe (1992) with a new way of analysis the classical rhetorical figures into fundamental operations. There are 4 parts in the original, classic rhetoric – inventio, dispositio, elocutio, and actio.  They four is Invention: the art of finding out what to talk about (p. 9), disposition: “putting discourse in order”, elocutio: stylistic elaboration of the arguments. The purpose of rhetoric is to produce adherence. The second tradition of new rhetorics by Groupe: to discover a set of general operations responsible for the functioning of the figures in verbal language (p.10). Two two approaches are mentioned. Critical studies approach- (persuasion as a whole) treats it as an art, careful reading of the message, a critic assess to the message (artisty, logic, ethics, social consequences). And behavioral approach – (quantitate) treats persuasion as a science, methodologies- quantitative content approach.

Sonesson (2013) wrote his analysis on three brands/products, the Absolute Vodka “European cities series”, a Turkish advertisement for car service and IKEA.

Sonesson (2013) studied the Absolut vodka and the relation to Europeans values, he analyzed the Absolute Vodka in 2 levels. Sonesson relate the Absolut “European cities” series to the figurative rhetoric. He analyzes the design of vodka bottle of different cities in the series to see how it present a certain city.

At the second level, he looks at the Absolut publicity from the point of view of argumentation and persuasion to see how and why Absolute Vodka creates the image related to Europe with its topos being a rich cultural heritage.

In the analysis, Sonesson analyzed the figurativity of the products/ advertisements to see how he brand attempts to use figuration to relate its product to some (positive) values that can persuade consumers to buy the products. The figuration does not necessarily be “true” because the values behind a certain advertisement is highly related to the cultural values of different cultures and more importantly, the cultural values that one country project no other country.

An example of persuasion in the advertisement is the advertising from coca-cola: Coca-Cola Small World Machines – Bringing India & Pakistan Together can show how persuasion is used to link two opposed cultures. The advertising link used virtual machines with cameras and place the two machines in the two countries, one in Pakistan and another one in India.

“A moment of happiness has the power to bring the world closer together.”

This slogan together with the content of the advertisement create a very meaningful message that persuades the viewers.

In the advertisement, the people on the two sides joint hand and trace a sign together and they got a can of Coca-Cola. This advertisement persuades people that a tidy action can break the barriers between people, even from the conflicted countries. This is also to say, Coca-Cola can be the drink to ignite a moment of happiness and pull people close together.

Reference List:

Coca-Cola Small World Machines – Bringing India & Pakistan Together. (2013, May 19). Retrieved June 09, 2017, from https://youtu.be/ts_4vOUDImE

Simons, H.W. (2001). The Study of Persuasion. In: H.W. Simons with J. Morreale & B.E. Gronbeck, Persuasion in Society (pp. 3-24), Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Sonesson, G. (2013). Two strands of rhetoric in advertising discourse. International Journal of Marketing Semiotics, 1(1), 6-24.