gq1997universe-blog - Tumblr blog

[gq1997universe-blog]

How Does Digital Platforms Changed Societal Life?

Through the analysis of these three experiments it is possible to understand how in contemporary times the impact and changes of new digital technologies affect social relationship, communication and culture, and labor condition. Moreover, the substitution of old technology with new one in each experiment led us understand the disruptive capacities of digital technologies. In the first experiment that I have made with two memes I have tried to compare new technologies with old ones. Clearly, new technology has pushed aside old technology; in fact, nowadays no one will rent a DVD from Blockbuster because we have the comfort to see whatever we want to see from our couch at home. According to Joshua M. Greenberg, an American academic working in sociology of scientific knowledge, “It’s likely that you don’t go to that store today, if it’s even still in business. You might rent movies from a massive franchise store, or you might get them by mail, fresh off your online queue; either way, you’re probably renting DVDs, not videocassettes, and the guy behind the counter has been replaced by data-aggregating recommendation algorithms.” This change is related to the invention of the home video industry because movie studios and electronics manufactures realized that with video, they were making more money compared to theatrical exhibition. For example, Sony was one of the first companies that permitted at least to be free from the fixed program schedules set by the television executives.

Evidently, the substitution of old technology with new one is not an unexpected change because through time we have made enormous improvements and technology is at the bottom of our daily life. Today the existence of Blockbuster store is limited to one (in Oregon) compared to the 4800 stores of the past. When in 2000 a company proposed to the Blockbuster CEO to buy a new streaming system he refused, that streaming system it’s now called Netflix. During these twenty years the idea of going out to rent a DVD or video cassettes is unthinkable for the new generations, with this improvement of technology we lost the pleasure of simple things. Unfortunately, innovation does not wait for you! And if you do not understand it, you are left behind. Consequently, Innovation is also largely about growth, recognizing new opportunities and changing what the company offers to the market. If it does not change the way it creates and delivers its offerings, it can be in trouble. And just like that, Blockbuster collapsed. Moreover, when we used to go to Blockbuster, we were more conscious about want genre of film we wanted to see and in case of indecision there were the Blockbuster costumers ready to help us finding the right DVD to see. Now, having so many choices for no reason we are even more confused, and we might spend the whole night searching for the right one and then ending up without choosing anything. The reason why a niche start-up company was able to drive the industry giant Blockbuster out of the market is its adaptability, embracement of new distribution models and obsession with smart technology. In conclusion, in the early 2000s Netflix was just a start-up company trying to compete against the absolute industry leader Blockbuster. Failure to innovate and reluctance to disrupt its own business model in order to adjust to the new market conditions and opportunities drove Blockbuster out of the market as the company shut down in 2010. Netflix is believed to have used the concept of disruptive innovation to over perform this competitor.

In the second experiment I have taken Uber as example to explain how new digital disruption technologies revolutionized and will gradually completely change the relations between workers and employers. In the reading “Towards a Fairer Gig Economy” written by Mark Graham, a professor of Internet Geography at the Oxford Internet Institute states: “While the gig economy offers jobs and income to many in need, it also represents a system with the capacity to exploit and alienate workers in new and innovative ways.”  Consequently, we do not have control on these new internet technologies and without even being aware that they are slowly changing our societies, workplaces, and relationships. Moreover, these new jobs, such as Uber drivers or Deliveroo workers, don’t even work in a comfortable condition and the only people who really take advantage on them are the owners of these huge digital platforms. For example, in the video that we watched in class called “Uber: the real lives of its drivers” are some Uber’s drivers who described what really means working for this kind of service. They affirmed that sometimes they could work even seven days a week and the money that they get in is below the minimum wage. Often drivers wait for hours outside their cars because if they stand outside the app works if they are seated in their cars Uber blocks it, so Uber can control exactly where they stand and they always ending up waiting without knowing how much time will past between one ride and another. In addition, even though uber workers are considered self-employed, they do not have the freedom of self-employed people because all is regulated by the app. At the moment data is stored in databases or at digital level therefore companies do not need employees anymore to know their clients and personalize the offer. The firm uses its employees only as couriers and they will be probably substituted when robots are going to be safe to use. As a result, the worker alone (rather than their employer or the platform) bears a huge amount of risk.” (Graham) Then, being a self-employed does not mean that the worker is more independent, it simply means that gig economy platforms are abusing of basic human rights. Next, in this system of gig work, the wealthy people get richer and others are left behind. All workers should have the same fundamental rights. In fact, Graham writes, “Unless governments step in and regulate the platform economy, the ‘future of work’ will be one of unprotected work and increasing inequality. We have the mechanisms to regulate the gig economy; all we need now is the willpower to do it.” To conclude, nowadays technology is capable of doing things in various sectors that before were unthinkable, such as in the health field, logistics or consumer goods, where robots and new technologies machines have led and are drastically increasing the reduction in the demand for labor. The only personas that will benefit from these new technologies are highly skilled workers with digital-technology skills; instead, low-skilled workers will find temporary and unstable jobs.

In the last experiment, I have chosen the platform Airbnb because is another clear example of how digital disruptive technology influence the way people live and how we are forced to change according to innovation. In fact, in the reading “The impact of Airbnb in our cities: Gentrification and ‘Disneyfication’ 2.0” written by Monica Bernardi she said that “short-term rents reinforce phenomena of social inequality and do not favor real redistribution of wealth”. For example, changing the way people move often influences the preference of the neighborhood to stay in: according to Airbnb, its visitors are inclined to choose the neighborhood that is less distracted by the tourist presence, thereby preferring a greater distribution of economic impacts for the benefit of communities that are usually removed from the tourist industry. According to researchers, “74% of Airbnb listings in major cities are located outside the traditional districts where hotels are located and 42% of guest-time is spent in the neighborhood where they are staying”. Consequently, the economic flows arising from the presence of these visitors thus have an impact on local economies and enterprises, benefiting the residents indirectly as well. Indeed, Airbnb believes that, in 52% of cases with low to medium incomes, it contributes to the well-being of its hosts, since the compensation earned through the platform allows additional savings and income to meet domestic expenses or to start new business entrepreneurship. Another negative aspect of these short-term rents like Airbnb is that massive tourist flows are at risk of transforming historic centers, particularly Italian ones, from key places of local and cultural and political life, into real cities of consumption. In fact, in the reading “Se il centro è vuoto”  Sarah Gainsforth interviewed Stefania Porcelli, the owner of Checco er Carrettiere, a famous restaurant close to Piazza Trillussa in Trastevere where she said that nowadays almost in every building, 8 apartments out of 10 are B&B and the neighborhood is getting depopulated. For this reason, in the center of Rome the number of tourists is higher than the number of residents. Every year at least 15 million of tourist visit Roma and their medium visits are 48/72 hours and they are concentrated near to the Vaticano, Campo de Fiori or Trastevere. According to the data collected by Inside of Airbnb, they have more than 25 thousand announcements in Rome. Half of the announcements are in the I Municipio and in 65% of the apartments, no one permanently lives. In fact, according to a research made by Filippo Celata, a researcher of La Sapienza, in the neighbored of city center, 19% of apartments are rents on Airbnb.

To conclude, the never-ending innovation of social media and digital media platforms in general will continue to shape not only our economy and labors, but also the way people interact to each other. As far as I am concerned, due to especially Airbnb platforms in my neighborhood, Trastevere, where I lived since, I was born there is no more the same atmosphere because as I showed in my last experiment many things are changing in particular in the last years.