mc-cheddar-blog - Tumblr blog

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

A post exploring the impact on new media technologies on cultural life

 In the previous two posts we considered the impact of new media technologies on the personal and political lives of humans. In this post we go further to explore how they shape and influence people’s cultural lives through analysing a couple of examples. We shall also consider both positive and negative consequences of new media technologies on cultural life just like we did in in the previous examples. 

 As mentioned in the two previous posts, new media technologies are different from mainstream media due to the fact that they employ different modes of content creation and dissemination. They are cheap and easy to use as compared to old media. They allow everyone to create and share their content with a large group of users in a short period of time as compared to old media. From a cultural perspective, these technologies have changed and continue change people’s cultural lives, that is they shape the way people engage in cultural behaviours and the way cultural products are produced. They allow ordinary citizens influence to influence each other’s cultural norms, values and practices. These previously marginalised social groups also influence dominant cultural norms, values and practices represented in mainstream media.

Prior to the emergence of new media technologies, mainstream media, that is the elites were the  only ones who have the power to shape people’s cultural experiences, behaviors and responses. This due to the fact that they own mainstream media. They influenced cultural behaviour by creating content that is shaped by the process of othering.This process arises from people’s tendency to categorize things. Through it,  people view themselves  as more attractive and superior to  those they perceive as different. They view these other people  as as inferior and as a threat to their wellbeing.

From a cultural perspective, the above paragraph basically highlights that mainstream media influences cultural behaviour by portraying elitist or western cultural values, norms, and practices as more attractive and superior while simultaneously representing non western cultures as threat, as unattractive, and inferior. this is something that is seen in movies this manipulates the audience into liking and adopting western ways of life and disliking other non western cultures ( Tepecikliglu, 2012 ).  for example, in mainstream media  western countries such as america together with their movies, music, fashion, food, and  ways of life are always represented as attractive while Africa is always portrayed as a country characterised by negative things such as famine, corruption, and diseases and violence. its cultural practices are also viewed as trivial. 

Moreover, muslims are also always portrayed as violent and barbaric people in all mainstream news and films. This negative representation of muslims was caused by the emergence of the violent islamic state religious movement commonly know as Isis. This identity of muslims is rather unjustified due to the fact that not only muslims are violent or part of isis. However, even if that is the case, mainstream media has managed to influence people in to thinking that africans, muslims and other non western people are a threat to the society, that they are dangerous and violent people( Tepecikliglu, 2012 ).

However, even if that is the cause, new media technologies are currently taking away mainstream media’s power to influence and shape cultural experiences and behaviours of ordinary citizens. They are giving this power to the same social groups that  are marginalised in mainstream media. This means that on new media technologies such as facebook and twitter, it is ordinary members of the society who have the power to influence  and shape  cultural responses and not the elites. However, this power comes with both positive and negative results.

As mentioned in the two previous posts, new media technologies are different from mainstream media due to the fact that they employ different modes of content creation and dissemination. They are cheap and easy to use as compared to old media. They allow everyone to create and share their content with a large group of users in a short period of time as compared to old media. From a cultural perspective, these technologies have changed and continue change people’s cultural lives, that is they shape the way people engage in cultural behaviours and the way cultural products are produced. They allow ordinary citizens influence to influence each other’s cultural norms, values and practices. These previously marginalised social groups also influence dominant cultural norms, values and practices represented in mainstream media. 

From a positive standpoint, new media technologies allow ordinary citizens to create their own cultures, to challenge and counter dominant cultural norms, values that the society upholds, norms and values which are always represented in mainstream news, films or television shows. They achieve this by creating  engaging in fanfiction and  online communities such as fandoms. They also circulate videos, pictures, music and memes that carry counter messages. for example, some muslims created an online movement called #not in my name in which the challenge the dominant negative representation of muslims in mainstream media( Balraj, 2011 ). 

Accordingly, a fandom known as bronies, is another example that can be utilized to validate the above argument about new media’s ability to allow ordinary citizens to create alternative cultural norms, and values. This fandom was created by a group of men who are fans of popular television show  called  my little pony which was created for young girls. These group of men uphold that this fandom is violation of dominant gender or males norms and a way of reconstructing masculinity, that is incorporating certain behaviours of masculinity which are viewed are not socially accepted( Hautakangas, 2015 ).These examples validate the view that new media technologies allow ordinary people to shape and challenge dominant cultures.  

Moreover, from a negative perspective, new media technologies do not just enable ordinary citizens to challenge dominant cultural practices, they also allow them to perpetuate these dominant practices. They also influence these people to engage in hate speech towards each others cultures, that is to talk bad about each other’s cultural norms values and practices( Awan, 2015). They also achieve this through creating negative videos, memes, and pictures. Islamophobia is one of the negative practices that new media technologies promote.This term refers to the fear and hatred of the islamic religion. Some people on social media sites promote islamophobia by circulating negative information or content about muslims through videos, memes, pictures and text messaging( ) In many cases muslims are blamed for every bad event( Awan, 2014 ). Moreover, homophobia is another negative online practice which refers to the hatred and dislike of homosexual people.

Moreover, new media technologies also have also given rise to anti -fandom communities. These are communities that find pleasure out of bullying people who are part of fandoms. one example of this is the bronies anti fandom. This fandom is against the fact that grown men enjoy watching a television show originally created for young girls. In this communities, bronies are perceived as perfects and peadophiles( Jones, 2015 ).   

This means that there are some people who promote negative images of homosexual people. This people are viewed as abnormal. These examples of negative cultural practices,  demonstrate that some entities utilize new media technologies to promote dominate cultural norms perpetuated in mainstream media and practiced throughout the society. they also highlight that this people utilize new media technologies such as Facebook to promote  hate speech. 

Bibliography

  Awan, I. ( 2914 ). islamophobia and Twitter: A typology of online hate against muslims on social media. 

Balraj, B, M.( 2011). My name is Khan and I am not a terrorist: Representation of muslims in my name is Khan. 

Hautangas, M. ( 2015 ). its ok to be joyful? My little Pony and Brony masculinity.

Jones, B. ( 2015 ). My little Pony, tolerance is magic: Gender, policing and Brony anti fandom                        

[mc-cheddar-blog]

fees must fall

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

Arab spring

[mc-cheddar-blog]

Say my name pictures

[mc-cheddar-blog]

Facebook releasing people’s personal information during the 2016 elections in the United states

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

Fake news

[mc-cheddar-blog]

[mc-cheddar-blog]

New Media and Political life

New media technologies today do not just shape people’s personal lives, they also influence their political lives. This post aims to demonstrate how new media technologies such as smartphones, computers, and social media positively and negatively shape the manner in which people engage in political activities. it shall utilize various examples to substantiate its argument.

As mentioned in the previous post, new media technologies are distinct from old media in terms of content creation and dissemination. They have changed how media content is created and circulated. They are cheap and easy to use. They allow everyone to make and share their content online in a short period of time. These technologies are said to have the potential to create a virtual public sphere( Papacharissi ).This is due to the fact that they have altered the way ordinary people engage in public matters. From a positive political point of view, these new media technologies bring about the following results for  those who utilize them.  

The opportunity to engage in political issues or activities

Before the emergence of new media technologies, the elites, that is the government and corporations were the only  ones who influenced political engagement or  behaviour. In many cases they achieved this through the mass media.  Marginalized members of the society had no say in political matters. However, today new media technologies provide these people with the opportunity to participate in political issues by directly engaging in a dialogue with the government or political leaders through social media sites such as Facebook or Twitter where they articulate their political grievences and desires ( Papacharissi ).

The opportunity to challenge and expose dominant political behaviors

New media technologies do not just allow ordinary members of the society to engage in political matters, they also allow them to challenge dominant political practices and to expose the bad habits of corporations and political leaders through social media sites such as Facebook, Twitter and Youtube. they achieve these activities by engaging in citizen journalism and also by mobilizing each to form online movements aimed at bring about social change. Some of these movements transform into real offline protests or marches and also yield some measurable results. examples of these  online movements include the Fees and Rhodes must fall movements,  the Arab spring and #Say her name movement  

The Fees must fall movement is a student protest which first began on twitter at the university of the witwatersrand in 2015. This movement’s ultimate goal was to contest the increment of high education fees( Daniels, 2016 ) However, it later evolved to expose issues such as colonization and lack of diversity or transformation in the South african high education system ( Daniels, 2016).The movement became a national and global phenomenon which led to the decrement of fees in all South African universities. The students, through the help of twitter as a new media technology were able to influence the behaviour of government officials.    

Moreover, the Rhodes must fall movement is also a student protest which emerged at Rhodes university. It first began on twitter and eventually became an offline movement. The students wanted the statue of Cecil John Rhodes to be removed within the university premises. They asserted that the statue symbolized racism, colonization and lack of transformation within the university( Daniels, 2016 ) This movement also became a success because the statue was eventually removed. Through the help of twitter, students once again were able to influence political behaviour of those in authority. 

 The arab spring on the other hand is another example of a social movement which first emerged on social media. This movement first emerged in tunisia and it was also lead by young people. These young people were unsatisfied  with some of the things that were present or happening in their country such as corruption and high rates of unemployment (Qadirmustag & Afzal, 2017). the movement later expanded to other countries within the middle east such as Morroco and Egypt. Moreover, within all these countries, young people who spearheaded the movement utilized Twitter and Facebook to expose political issues that were prevalent in their countries. The movement also became a success due to the fact that it caused the political leaders such as Hosni Mubarack to resign as the president of Egypt ( Qadirmustag & Agfzal, 2017).

Accordingly, the #Say her name movement is  a social moment which emerged in the United States in 2015. The movement’’s aim is to raise public awareness about black female victims of police brutality. It attempts to change the perception that only African american males are victims of police brutality in America ( Richardson, 2016 ). The movement utilizes twitter to establish online campaigns aimed at exposing this problem faced by African american females.   

 The above three examples highlight that new media technologies especially social media has given the youth and all ordinary members of the society a platform to engage in political issues and to influence public opinion. This is something they never had prior to the emergence of social media. However, these new technologies have also  given politicians, the government and corporations an alternative way of influencing and shaping political behaviour. research highlights that this people are able to acquire personal information of ordinary citizens on social media sites such as facebook and twitter which they utilize to control and shape their behaviour( Uldam, 2016)

  Corporations or businesses use this information to gain some insight regarding  people’s interests.This allows them to know what people are more likely to buy and what products to advertise to them. This corporations also utilize social media sites to identify any online social movements that may negatively affect their business. Research illustrates that these corporations associate themselves with all social movements that pose a threat to their name as an attempt to protect themselves.for example, research reveals that Shell and Bp as oil companies began associating themselves with online movements aimed at fighting climate. These companies offered sponsorships to the community( Uldam, 2016 ). Moreover, politicians  on the other hand utilize this information to influence the public’s voting behaviour during elections. The following example substantiate the above argument . During the elections in America, Facebook released personal information of it's billions of American users which assisted Obama to win the elections ( Moore, 2016)  

This ability of politicians and corporations to exploit and use new media technologies as alternative surveillance tools poses a threat to ordinary members of the society because it takes away their freedom of participation that they thought they had. Accordingly, from a political perspective, new media technologies have given rise to negative online trends initiated by both the elites and low class members of the society. One example of this trends is fake news. Fake news refers to false media content aimed at shaping and influencing public opinion and behaviour( Allcott & Gentzkow, 2017). Ordinary members of the society usually circulate this false content with the aim of obtaining more followers and likes on social media. However, research reveals that these people in some cases also circulate false information to influence public behaviour especially during the elections.

 For example, during the 2016 elections in the United states, ordinary members of the society disseminated false information about Donald Trump and Hilary Clinton.( Allcott & Gentzkow )This false information influenced many citizens to vote for Donald Trump over Hilary Clinton. furthermore, some politicians also utilize the term fake or false  news as a defense mechanism in which they declare accurate information about them as false or fake. One example of of these people is the current president of the United States of America, Donald Trump. This man always  labels any negative information about him circulated in the media as false even if its true. 

In conclusion, new media technologies have given ordinary members of the society as platform to engage in and to challenge political activities. These people are able to expose the bad habits of political leaders and corporations. However, these technologies also provide the elites with an alternative way of monitoring political behaviour \and they also lead to bad political practices such as fake news. 

Bibliography 

Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. ( 2017 ). Social media and fake news in the 2016 Election. Journal of Economic Perspectives 31.2, pp. 211-236 

Moore, M, M. (2017 ). Submission to: Inquiry into Fake news Culture, Media and power. London: kings College

Papacharissi, Z. ( 2009). The virtual Sphere, 2.0: The internet, the public sphere and beyond. Routledge Handbook of internet politics. New york: Routledge.

Qardirmushtaq, A, & Afzal, M. ( 2017 ). Arab Spring : Its causes and Consequences.

Richardson, A.( 2016 ). # Say her name. Vol 4 edition: Teaching# black lives matter: media, race and social movements.

Uldam, J. ( 2016 ). Corporate management of visibility and the fantasy of the post political: Social media and surveillance. New Media & Society 18, pp. 201- 219.