The last blog post incorporated quite positive views on media and how we interact with it. In this post, we will think more critically on these ideas and considering social media platforms more. For example, while Wikipedia is non-profit, Facebook and YouTube are profit driven (Van Dick & Nieborg, 2009, p. 856). This drastically changes the intentions of the different platforms. At the end of the day, these sites are businesses. As last time, the audience will be considered here are well.
In particular, we will be criticizing the idea of participatory culture as defined by Henry Jenkins. A participatory culture integrates the users, audience, fans and consumers in the creation of the culture and content (Fuchs, 2014, p. 52). Wikipedia is an example of this as it is a platform where the users can contribute to the content and means of sharing information. Social media, is by these means, an expression of participatory culture (p. 54). This of course relates to spreadable media as the user places such an important role and are even empowered by the experience (p. 53). However, when it comes to profit driven platforms, the context of capitalism becomes to big of an influence to ignore in such media analysis.
Beginning with the criticisms by Fuchs (2014), we become aware of the problems with the association participation has with democracy. participation is a democratic principle, but when it comes to social media the participation is not equal. This is expressed in many ways, for example with the lack of visibility (p. 60). In general, some participants are more or less active so there is also no way to standardize this. Tied to this, is the problems with the economic principles of media. What the previous readings overlook is the capitalist context must be brought to awareness. Often times, ownership is overlooked. This is a big issue as this can not only create a monopoly or monopolizes a social media platform, but can get advantages over the regular users (p. 55-57). This is done through having a research advantage which leads to having more means to create.
Not only this, but the idea of digital labor is brought up by Fuchs (2014, p. 61). This idea is that the creations the users post, share, create and/or modify no longer are done for pleasure or leisure, but as a job. The problem with social media is that these users are working for them for free and are arguably being exploited (p.63). As much as I agree that they are taken advantage of, I am hesitant to relate this to a forced doctrine as they can stop any time–nobody is forcing their hand.
To wrap up Fuchs (2014), I must also mention that he is critical of popular culture. This is because it exploit the ideologies of the people (p. 65). This is done because the power social media holds can enforce certain ideologies on people.
In search for more information, I also came across a reading by Van Dijck and Nieborg (2009). This reading was an analysis of corporate manifestos. This was done to deconstruct the commodity culture we are a part of (p. 855). How these were written were often very persuasive and incorporated pronouns like “we” to make the reader feel connected (p. 858). However, they really promised too much. Looking at this review really showed the exploration phase corporate, social media platforms impose on us.
Taking these factors into consideration, I do look more critically at the actions of large corporations like Facebook and Twitter as they have so much control over their users and what information they can take. For example, what really bothers me is that users are not equally visible. Take Kylie Jenner’s cosmetic line for instance. Without spending a lot of money on advertisement, she shared her line over platforms like Facebook, snapchat and Instagram. This spread her brand and saver her lots of money. It even got other users to share their make-ups looks further. However, it was only so successful because she had the following to reach such a wide audience.
The above image is a promotion Snapchat by Kylie.
Companies, regardless of the product they are trying to show, simply do not have the visibility that such a celebrity has and have a lot harder time promoting and selling their product. Not only does this apply to business ventures, but to any other content-creator. You might be a great photographer, but without having enough views, your art will have a lot harder time circulating. Therefore, it is important to keep a critical eye on corporate, social media.
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.