“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.