Monday, September 27, 2010

The Brave New World of Indymedia




The word ‘indy’ is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as “A form of auto racing in which specially constructed cars are driven around a banked, regular, typically oval circuit, which allows for exceptionally high speeds”. This best describes the current media environment which is ever changing in the advent of new technologies which are being churned out at racing speeds. The dynamism of all media new or old is the correlation between the old and the new that is that the new media are born out of old media. The notion that new medias render their predecessors irrelevant banishes them to the realm of ‘dead media’ is not entirely true because of a variety of factors such as the adoptive curve and economic trends of different cultures. As I am typing this I am using Microsoft word, which essentially resembles a white blank sheet of paper and the act of typing is a transformation of writing. The old media of writing on a sheet of paper has been transferred onto a computer by technology illustrating that even when old technologies are replaced they endure through the new technology because of salience and esteem in the old by the target users. Hence technologies of media rely on the cultural economy in order to successfully permeate society. The cultural economy dictates that value comes from meaning and the use of media technologies lies in what they mean to a given society or the subculture they give rise to. I agree with the argument that the omnipresence of media technologies throughout societies is part of refeudalism, that is the use of culture disseminated through the media to perpetuate and indeed continue an in-just system of economic control. According to Amin "the prodigious intensification of communication by the media, now global in scope, has both quantitatively and qualitatively modified the contradiction generated by the unequal expansion of capitalism" (Poster, p. 11).



Evidently people are using the meaning of media technologies to create meanings for themselves. Media technologies have given its users platforms to express their individuality but it has also enabled the individual to be a part of the world in a true sense of being a global citizen. It is often said that technologies influence entire societies when in actuality there is a symbiotic relationship between what the technology does for the user and how the users reinforces and indeed adds to uses of the technology. I think a lot about YouTube which has made it possible for aspiring musicians to get their work noticed by people in the music industry leading to entire careers and global sensations like Justin Bieber. This young talent’s mother posted all his concerts on YouTube and soon Usher and Justin Timberlake were in debate on which one of them would sign the young man up as an artist in their record labels. YouTube empowered the Biebs by granting him access to the impenetrable entertainment industry turning him into a pop icon. The debut album is appropriately titled My World 2.0 which suggests the shift from top down organization of information production to a more interactive one which could be bottom up or bottom to other bottoms. This illustrates how new media technologies literally enable individuals to have the world in their hands in what is being termed 'cyberculture' explained as being "an expression of an increasingly individualized society in a globalized world" (Deuze, p. 63). As much as the internet has opened doors and enriched the lives of many, it has also created social pathologies or rather people have found ways to use it in ways for which it was not originally intended. The likes of sexual predators, internet financial scammers, creators of viruses and fanatical groups make the cyber world an ominous place. Additionally, for all the things technology can do, it does not on account of inequity in global societies where many merely don’t have access to technology.


Mass media technology these days is partially defined by the users because they help in its production as is seen in the 2.0 social networks. Things such as the Obamacon are some of the ways in which people appropriate things from the social context and personalize them through technology and use them to tell personal stories about ourselves. People willingly broadcast to the world intricate details of their everyday lives in an effort to exude a certain personality type to their audience. About ten years ago scientist speculated that the global nature of internet use would blur the distinct cultural identities and out of this blur a singularity would emerge. A singularity of culture, politics, religion and thought meaning global communication would have caused a new world order. A bit of an exaggeration I think but more realistically mass media communications are changing the way we interact with people, the way we talk and the way we conduct business. The notion that media technology is causing a hegemonic culture is irrational the statement "culture as struggle and media as means in that struggle" (Pingree, 2003) in my opinion highlights the symbiotic relationship society, technology and media have. Presently though the change is seemingly flowing in one direction that is from west to everywhere else but possibly with the spreading of good governance and the hope of a new world information communication order, a more equal exchange of knowledge sharing will become a reality.