CULTURE OF CONVERGENCE
CULTURE OF CONVERGENCE
Question:- Data and electricity are not objects. They are 'stuff without a tangible character. You can't touch data. You can touch the paper (an object) upon which data is written; you can touch the screen (an object) upon which data is displayed; but you can't touch the data itself (Leonardi, 2010). Use this quote as a starting point for discussing materialities of digital media.
The word "materiality" has started to appear more frequently in writings of different writers across various fields such as communication studies, management and sociology etc. However, the question is ‘What does this term signify?’ Let's start by looking at it in other domains to see how it is applied. Although organizations are flooded with new digital artefacts; Orlikowski (2007), argues that the term materiality in organization is "often downplayed, disregarded or taken for granted”. Despite this, Orlikowski (2007), appears to interpret materiality broadly as "things." The definition of materiality in the context of an "object" implies tangibility and physical sensation, that can be characterized as "stuff." Examples of "tangible stuff" under Orlikowski's (2007), definition include things such as clothing, tables, and books etc. as they can be handled and are therefore characterized as "objects".
Electricity and data, however, are not objects. Without a distinct personality, they are just "things." You can only touch object like a screen or paper on which different forms of data can be displayed or written. Data itself is not touchable (Leonardi, 2010). Similarly, in case of voice, you can touch the fiber-optic cables and copper used in speech transmission, as well as switches and routers used for voice direction, but you cannot touch the data packets itself used in speech encoding (Littau, 2016). Hence, Orlikowski (2007), believes that tangibility is not a required element in the notion of materiality as her research shows that users "connect with the materiality of different search engines such as Google, yahoo & safari etc. on a daily basis" Many academics, who have a grasp about this subject also struggle to define materiality, as their explanations initially revolves around the definition of materiality which could be that it’s just a physical item and gradually shifts to digital artefact like software’s. Similarly, traditional sociological studies initially had their focus on social things that were relevant to their domain and ignored materiality which was defined by Trevor Pinch (2008), as "the realm of objects and things". Materiality was considered by sociologist as irrelevant as the term "material" in sociological studies referred to a behavior that was deeply linked with objects, however, the materiality of these objects was never taken in to consideration (Pinch, 2008) to the extent that even technologies were considered to be merely symbolic in nature (Hutchby, 2003). Therefore, after thoughtful consideration many sociologists who were intrigued by this concept started to explore this idea of "material in material practices” due to the wide- ranging scope of this concept and the limited research that had been carried out on it (Pinch & Swedberg, 2008). Therefore, it was assessed by Pinch & Swedberg (2008), after analyzing several studies on the creation and application of various "material objects" to demonstrate how sociological practices fundamentally transform sociology and elevate materiality to a more central place in this discipline. He supported his argument by using a mixture of physical and digital artefacts (Pinch & Trocco, 2004) which included the use of synthesizers that comprise of both hardware and software, such as cars, (kline & Pinch, 1996) bicycle (bijker,1997), and Electronic Publishing software’s (Boczkowski, 2005) etc. to further illustrate this concept. This concept was further elaborated by Leonardi (2007), as he emphasized the role of “material features in software’s” that enable the user to perform various tasks such as work assignment, work delegation and recording solutions to specific problems etc. through a help-desk queuing software. The term "material" used in this concept identifies the feature of the technology that enables the users to perform a certain action that cannot be attributed to human purpose alone (Leonardi, 2009). For example: Enterprise resource planning (ERP) software, also has "material components," such as algorithms that are set in a manner that they give access to only certain individuals to authorize payments for any financial transaction (Volkoff et al., 2007).
This idea was further discussed by Pickering (2010), according to whom “It is impossible to envisage any blend of bare human brains and bodies that could act as a replacement for telescopes, let alone a machine tool, or an atom bomb.", which reflects the strong emphasizes on the performativity of the material when employed and the opportunity it provides to individuals to showcase their talents, rather than focusing on the physical nature of the substance in which case, software’s could not be characterized as “material” in this conceptual-framework. On the other hand, Ashcraft et al. (2009), describes the shift in the paradigm of communication studies towards constitutive models of communication that were founded on the idea that communiqué creates reality as oppose to just transmitting it. This encouraged a shift in academic focus from material to the symbolic nature of materiality (Smith, 2013). Therefore Ashcraft et al. (2009), argues that in order to remain relevant and have theoretical and applied significance, it is essential that communication theorists adhere to the “materiality of organization". There are many managerial decisions and tasks that are undertaken by organizations with the aid of software’s, such as screening, recruitment, training, forecasting, market research & analysis etc. (Orlikowski's, 2007). The information required by the decision makers to actualize their concepts & ideas is derived from the assistance of software’s which in the context of the definition of material discussed earlier on would suggest that software’s in organizational settings are in fact "material", as these groupware technologies have characteristics that display "material attributes" (Horst and Miller, 2012). Hence, any substance that can transform an idea into action, regardless of whether it is in a physical state or in a digital format, can be considered material, provided that it adds value to the job, such as pivot table & regression function etc. (Horst and Miller, 2012). However, artefacts that do not add value to the job or possess traits considered crucial for completing a particular sort of work, regardless of their physical nature would not be considered as “material” because material attributes of an item are perceived differently by individuals as their importance & functionality varies across different applications (DeSanctis & Poole, 1994). Since the notion of Materiality is not restricted to only physical artefacts, as discussed above, therefore its applicability can also be extended to various forms of digital artefacts, such as digital media.
Digital media is a form of communication that employs various encoded machine- readable data standards. The digital data in this communication is represented by series of digits. It incorporates all forms of electronic data ranging from audible, visual, and textual that can be created, edited, viewed, shared, listened and stored on a digital electronic device (Smith, 2013). This also includes photos, videos and text etc. shared via internet - (the last media, where information is accessible without any barriers) (Rayburn, 2012). The access of media & digital media to the masses with the help of internet, personal computers and mobile phones, along with continuous innovations in the field of publishing, public relations, journalism, entertainment, business, education and technology etc. have made a profound and wide-ranging intricate impact on culture and society as a whole (Paul, no date).
When we discuss digital media, it is imperative that we should also include the genealogy of other analogue media technologies as part of our conversation. These analogue media technologies such as stone tablet, paper, gramophone record, film reel, hard disks, floppies, cassette tape and compact disc (read only & re-writable cylinder substrate) etc. always possessed a material substrate in their actions, which was their most crucial component (Manoff, 2006). The state of this material substrate would generally determine the outcome - (signal generated by the substrate) of the action (Manoff, 2006). However, the evolution of technology that brought us digital media has rendered these media technologies obsolete, as the material substrate has now been replaced by Graphical user Interface, Cloud storage and online streaming platforms etc. (Willems, 2019) further masking the underlying technology. Even the novel problems created by digital media such as intellectual property theft & copyright issues that are protected under the “intellectual property law” (Coldiron, 2016) are being circumvented by authors to support the growing popularity of open content movement in which the author relinquish some or all of their legal rights on their published works, such as open source code software’s that ensures that people have easy access to it, while providing them the opportunity of innovating this artefact to its optimal potential through their personalized vision. These initiatives have changed the perspective of the society as a whole and have motivated us to evolve ourselves to the point that we can usher in the era of "Information Age", which is widely regarded as the “Paperless society” (Dewar, 1998). However, there are still obstacles to this digital transformation that need to be dealt with before the society can truly realize its complete transformation.
There are many prevailing theories and perspectives with regard to the history and applicability of materiality in media. For example, during the 1980’s & '90s, the idea of materiality of digital media in Cyber culture was non-existent, as Barlow (1996), claimed in his manifesto "Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace” that "there is no matter” in cyberspace as it comprises of immaterial simulated data. He also considered cyberspace as the “new home of mind” implying that people could freely express their thoughts & emotions in this space without any prejudice as the internet was not governed by any sovereign nation (Barlow, 1996).
Nonetheless, it was cyber culture that introduced the concept of hybrid being that was half-organic and half-machine that blurred the porous boundary between the physical world of the body & mind with the immaterial world of information. Moreover, this concept was further highlighted by Haraway (1991), from a critical materialist viewpoint in the 'Cyborg Manifesto,' that blurred the lines between human, animal, and machine from a feminist, socialist, and materialist perspective contrary to Barlow's (1996), perspective of immaterial character of digital networks.
In contrast to this, Mcluhan & Lapham (1994), argued that the invention of the telegraph in 1873 paved the way for the conceptualization of the idea of a material- less world that was metaphysical in nature, where space and time did not exist, so that humanity might transcend from its material form. Over the years, this idea has considerably evolved with the help of innovation in technology and the influence of media. In their theory of media, McLuhan's & Lapham (1994), who are famous communication theorist argue in support of the notion of "Electric Age" - (electricity is viewed as the "ultimate media", and the term “Electrical current” is used as a metaphor that represents strength and pervasiveness of a freshly detached mind that could transform raw energy into a form of matter-destroying force that generates a unified, communal consciousness). The focus of this theory was on the “material limitations of the media” with which the message is communicated as McLuhan & Lapham (1994), said “The Medium is the Message” and how it affects human consciousness and society as a whole (Staunton, 2016).
Alternatively, the Cybernetic theory focuses on the perspective of information processing, while taking into account the “limitation of technological implementation in communication”. This theory tends to focus on the aspect of communicating maximum level of information across to the other end with the least level of interference resulting from material phenomena’s, such as Noise errors, distorted signals, broken circuit components or signal interference on transmission lines etc. (Pierce and Paulos, 2013). These interferences reflect the materiality of the system which are eradicated through the use of Feedback loops that can detect and implement fixes to these errors, in order to eradicate the materiality of the system by bringing the signal to near perfection across all levels to prevent the signal from degrading (Pierce and Paulos, 2013).
All these theories reflect the various interlinkages that exist between materiality & media through different perspective. The paradigm on media studies that views the relationship between media & materiality through the lens of philosophy and media ecology is known as "neo materialist or new materialist" paradigm (Fuller, 2005). The term "Media ecology," in this context of media refers to the interaction between users & various media technologies through an intricate network (Fuller, 2005). It is often argued by scholars that media ecology should be studied through the perspectives of "materialist energies in art and techno culture" (Fuller, 2005); "Eco Media" (Cubitt, 2005), while keeping in mind the political and aesthetic elements of media (Parikka, 2015), which can pave the way for its evolution. It is often suggested that this evolved version of media ecology can address the issue of interconnectedness between people and other species, while challenging the role of digital media that has led the way in the deterioration of our natural habitats (Kumar & Parikh, 2013).
However, New Materialism focuses on the materiality of technical media as it deems them to be processual, ephemeral, vibrant and relational, as it is of the view that all inanimate objects in the world have a vitality of their own, as the whole world is considered as a big lump of living stuff, while rejecting the idea of dualism of active subjects and passive objects (Bennett, 2010). Therefore, there is no division between spirituality and materiality in this paradigm, which is quite contrary to the extreme point of view of both social constructivism - (everything is seen as a social creation) and mechanist view - (objects are seen as fixed and unchangeable, while humans are the only entity with free will) (Bennett, 2010).
This theory of new materialism was inspired by the thoughts of neo-vitalist views of ancient materialist thinkers such as Democritus and Socrates, who claimed that everything is made up of elementary particles in motion (Bennett, 2010), which were later on determined as atoms. It was further suggested by Bennett (2010) that all inanimate objects and systems possess "thing-power"- (the ability of things to form new assemblages and have an influence over humans). The relationship dynamics of “thing-power materialism" in an objects life are such that materiality acts as a protean flow of matter-energy, while the object acts as a constructed form of that flow (Horsti and Horsti, 2019).
In light of this discussion and the critical analysis of various studies on this subject carried out by many scholars and theorist, it can be suggested that all the theories that have been part of this conversation have features that strongly resonate with the idea that despite the virtual state of digital media and communication; it has tangible aspects to it with far reaching implications that can affect our day-to-day lives (Willems, 2019). This concept of materiality may be difficult to comprehend at first but after analyzing its ramifications and material roots in different settings it can be deduced that materiality is in fact an integral part of the virtual setting.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Ashcraft, K. L., Kuhn, T. R., & Cooren, F. (2009). 1 Constitutional amendments:“Materializing” organizational communication. Academy of Management annals, 3(1), 1-64.
2. Barlow,P.,1996.ADeclarationoftheindependenceofcyberspace.[Online] Available at: https://www.eff.org/cyberspace-independence
[Accessed 15 December 2022].
3. Bennett,J.,2010.VibrantMatter:APoliticalEcologyofthings.NorthCarolina, USA: Duke University press books.
4. Bijker, W. E. (1997). Of bicycles, bakelites, and bulbs: Toward a theory of sociotechnical change. MIT press.
5. Boczkowski,P.J.(2005).Digitizingthenews:Innovationinonlinenewspapers. mit Press.
6. Coldiron, A.E.B. (2016) ‘Response by Coldiron to “ Translation and the materialities of communication ”’, 1700. doi:10.1080/14781700.2015.1085433.
7. Cubitt,S.,2005.EcoMedia.Amsterdam-NewYork:RodopiB.V.
8. DeSanctis, G., & Poole, M. S. (1994). Capturing the complexity in advanced technology use: Adaptive structuration theory. Organization science, 5(2), 121-147.
9. Dewar, J. A. (1998). The information age and the printing press: Looking backward to see ahead.
10.Fuller, M., 2005. Media Ecologies: Materialist Energies in Art and Technoculture. s.l.:MIT Press.
11.Haraway, D., 1991. A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology and Socialist- Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century, in simians, cyborgs and women: The Reinvention of Nature. 1st ed. New York: Routledge.
12.Horst, H. and Miller, D. (2012) ‘Normativity and Materiality : A View from Digital Anthropology’, (145), pp. 103–112.
13.Horsti, A. and Horsti, K. (2019) ‘Digital materialities in the diasporic mourning of migrant death’, 34, pp. 671–681
14.Hutchby, I. (2003). Affordances and the analysis of technologically mediated interaction: A response to Brian Rappert. Sociology, 37(3), 581-589.
15.Kumar, N.; Parikh, T.S. (2013) ‘Mobiles , Music , and Materiality’, pp. 2863– 2872.
16.Kline, R., & Pinch, T. J. (1996). Taking the black box off its wheels: The social construction of the automobile in rural America. Technology and Culture, 37, 776-795.
17.Leonardi, P. M. (2007). Activating the informational capabilities of information technology for organizational change. Organization science, 18(5), 813-831.
18.Leonardi, P. M. (2009). Why do people reject new technologies and stymie organizational changes of which they are in favor? Exploring misalignments between social interactions and materiality. Human Communication Research, 35(3), 407-441.
19.Leonardi, P. M. (2010). Digital materiality? How artifacts without matter, matter. First monday.
20.Littau, K. (2016) ‘Translation and the materialities of communication Translation Studies Forum : Translation and the materialities of’, 1700. doi:10.1080/14781700.2015.1063449.
21.Manoff, M. (2006) ‘The Materiality of Digital Collections : Theoretical and Historical Perspectives’.
22.Mcluhan, M. &. Lapham, H.L., 1994. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. s.l.:The MIT Press.
23.Orlikowski, W. J. (2007). Sociomaterial practices: Exploring technology at work. Organization studies, 28(9), 1435-1448.
24.Parikka, J., 2015. A Geology of Media. Minneapolis, London: University of minnesota press.
25.Paul, C. (no date) ‘DIGITAL ART NOW : HISTORIES OF ( IM ) MATERIALITIES’, 5.
26.Pickering, A. (2010).The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. University of Chicago Press.
27.Pierce, J. and Paulos, E. (2013) ‘Electric Materialities and Interactive Technology’, pp. 119–128.
28. Pinch, T. (2008). Technology and institutions: Living in a material world. Theory and society, 37(5), 461-483.
29.Pinch, T. J., & Swedberg, R. (2008). Living in a Material World: Economic Sociology Meets Science and Technology Studies (Inside Technology). MIT Press.
30.Pinch, T., & Trocco, F. (2004). Analog days: The invention and impact of the Moog synthesizer. Harvard University Press.
31.Rayburn, D. (2012). Streaming and digital media: understanding the business and technology. Routledge.
32.Smith, R. (2013). What is digital media? Centre for Digital Media.
33.Staunton, T., 2016. Marshall Mcluhan, "The medium is the message" - Theories every careers advisor should know. [Online]
[Accessed 01 January 2023].
34. Volkoff, O., Strong, D. M., & Elmes, M. B. (2007). Technological embeddedness and organizational change. Organization science, 18(5), 832-848.
35.Willems, W. (2019) ‘“ The politics of things ”: digital media , urban space and the materiality of publics’.
Comments
Post a Comment