The Domestication of New Media and Invisible Audiences
Firstly I think that I should say that the development of new media is something that I have always found interesting. Not so much the technological side of it but more where it fits in a social context. I first thought that the prevalence of new media, particularly social media, was bad, that it was ruining social interaction because everyone, me included, was too engrossed in their phones to actually talk to one another.
However, my studies of new media at uni have caused me to reassess this and try and find its positive applications, particularly in regard to social practices.
One thing that I found particularly interesting about this week’s content is the idea of an audience’s immersion in new media and its resulting ‘domestication.’ This was discussed in Mark Deuze’s 2011 article “Media Life” in which he talks about the idea of a ‘mediapolis’: “a comprehensively mediated public space where media underpins and overarches the experiences and expressions of everyday life.” (Deuze, 2011. 137) As new media now underpins so much of modern life, it is no longer an external component of life but rather it’s appropriations penetrate all aspects of society, meaning it is lived in rather than lived with. Consequently this media becomes mundane and ‘domesticated.’ Donath J and Boyd D stated in their article “Public Displays of Connection that due to this domestication, people are now “accustomed to thinking of the on-line world as a social space.” This is where my initial apprehension of the decline of social practices was addressed. It suggests new media has not caused social practices to decline, instead they’re shifting and changing the focus of socialisation and the way people communicate. (Donath J, Boyd D. 2004 71) Therefore, this immersion and consequent domestication in new media means people have new focuses and areas for social interaction. While studying this week, I came across this book, Young People and the New Media by Sonia Livingstone, (see reference list for link) discussing the ways young people interact with new media and how this is affecting their social practices. This book and the two aforementioned articles perfectly outline how new media actually creates new spaces for social interaction rather than simply destroying traditional social practices.
Another concept that ties in with the domestication of new media is the invisibility of a modern audience. New media allows for an audience to be of a global scale but it is almost impossible to determine who the audience actually is. An audience is an integral part of “influencing content production” (Bernstein 2013) and also contributes to “people’s struggle to position themselves in new media,” (Deuze 2011. 137) or establish a sense of self or identity. Consequently, it seems that huge amounts of content is produced in hope of creating a sense of identity within an incredibly large and anonymous network. As a result people become even more immersed in media and take to many platforms to create a unique identity and voice.
Deuze, Donath and Boyd all stated that media is becoming more and more pervasive and we are adjusting to finding new means of expression and self formation. As this continues it becomes domesticated and people are again exposed to more and more media and as a result we are now “living a media life.” (Deuze 2011. 138)
Reference List
Deuze, Mark (2011. Media Life, Media, Culture & Society 33 (1) pp.137-148
Donath, Judith and Boyd, Danah (2004). Public Displays of Connection BT Technology Journal22 (4) pp.71-82.
Livingstone, Sonia. 2002. Young People and The New Media SAGE Publications Ltd. London (http://books.google.com.au/books?hl=en&lr=&id=e4AHeRPLs0oC&oi=fnd&pg=PP2&dq=sonia+livingstone+new+media&ots=mykOrK5qNw&sig=eD5DCMYTVts2Kbis3NreffmoDvk#v=onepage&q=sonia%20livingstone%20new%20media&f=false)
Bernstein M. 2013 Quantifying The Invisible Audiences in Social Networks http://hci.stanford.edu/publications/2013/invisibleaudience/invisibleaudience.pdf