#communicative capitalism

[ithisatanytime]

(𝘉𝘙𝘐𝘋𝘌)

[anincantationofstories]

Today, the circulation of content in the dense, intensive networks of global communications relieves top-level actors (corporate, institutional and governmental) from the obligation to respond. Rather than responding to messages sent by activists and critics, they counter with their own contributions to the circulating fl ow of communications, hoping that sufficient volume (whether in terms of number of contributions or the spectacular nature of a contribution) will give their contributions dominance or stickiness. Instead of engaged debates, instead of contestations employing common terms, points of reference or demarcated frontiers, we confront a multiplication of resistances and assertions so extensive that it hinders the formation of strong counterhegemonies.

Communicative Capitalism: Circulation and the Foreclosure of Politics, by Jodi Dean

[anincantationofstories]

All in all, a strong message [critical of the Bush adminstration’s case for invading Iraq] was out there.

But, the message was not received. It circulated, reduced to the medium. Even when the White House acknowledged the massive worldwide demonstrations of February 15, 2003, Bush simply reiterated the fact that a message was out there, circulating – the protestors had the right to express their opinions. He didn’t actually respond to their message. He didn’t treat the words and actions of the protestors as sending a message to him to which he was in some sense obligated to respond. Rather, he acknowledged that there existed views different from his own. There were his views and there were other views; all had the right to exist, to be expressed – but that in no way meant, or so Bush made it seem, that these views were involved with each other. So, despite the terabytes of commentary and information, there wasn’t exactly a debate over the war. On the contrary, in the days and weeks prior to the US invasion of Iraq, the anti-war messages morphed into so much circulating content, just like all the other cultural effluvia wafting through cyberia.

Communicative Capitalism: Circulation and the Foreclosure of Politics, by Jodi Dean

[self-conscious-selfie]

“Communicative capitalism subsumes communication into digital networks premised on access and immediacy. Almost any feeling, image, or thought can be shared with another, instantly added to the larger flow of feelings, images, and thoughts. In this setting of ubiquitous media, where we are enjoined to participate, contribute, and share – and where we enjoy participating, contributing, and sharing – the means of literary and artistic production, reproduction, and distribution have converged. The technologies we use to communicate and create push our ideas and images into networks and onto screens. That the camera is a phone tells us that images are for communicating” (Dean 2016).

Yet... it’s still a blatant form of capitalism. Where do we draw the line? This example was brought to our attention by Shannon: the Twitter account @SheRatesDogs posts screenshots of abusive or appalling digital interactions from men, towards women. Although this may present as a form of resistance and reclamation, the account creates merchandise based on phrasing from particularly “popular” posts. Is this not an exploitation of women’s lived experience as targets of sexual violence, just in alternate form?

Dean, Jodi. “Selfie Communism.” Images Without Viewers, 2 Feb. 2016.

[bodynet]

The proliferation of digital media in the 21st century has once again shown the deeply ambivalent and contradictory potentials of technological development.

Digital technologies have been celebrated for enabling new levels of democratic communication, participatory media production, community building and media activism. From Wikipedia, to open source programming, open access publishing, and peer-to-peer file sharing, we have witnessed the rise of a range of alternative forms of communication and media production that seemed to challenge established media business models and momentarily contested corporate power.

This conference invites contributions that offer a critical analysis of corporate media culture and alternatives to it and thus contribute to rethinking power in communicative capitalism. 

[fleursartificielles]

Jodi Dean - The Limits of the Web in an Age of Communicative Capitalism

Communicative capitalism is essentially updating Adorno’s theories concerning the “Culture Industries” and applying them to the Internet.

[culturegeist]

Jodi Dean - The Limits of the Web in an Age of Communicative Capitalism

(This is a great debunking of cyber-utopian thinking that we can all find ourselves easily getting sucked into with it being one of the dominant discourses of our age. Goes someway to explaining why it is that culture today feels so stagnant and static) [posted by @unluckydip]