Understanding of the Contemporary Media Landscape - Coursework Example

How do the concepts of networks and the network society contribute to the understanding of the contemporary media landscape Introduction “Imagine a world in which every person on the planet is given free access to the sum of all free knowledge” (Jimmy Wales, cited in, Weber, L. 2009, xi). Throughout history, information (or knowledge) and communication have been the primary sources for the dominant form of power, and also for initiating social changes and reforms. This is owing to the fact that, social battles (in the form of ushering in changes or reforms), are predominantly concerned with being able to influence and control people’s mind and thinking processes through information and communication (Sztompka, 1994). In the modern 21st century, we find that this field of information and communication is undergoing a series of changes, arising from various technological innovations, and forming a new setting for the access, subject matter, formatting, and interactive sessions, adding a new dimension to the socio-political world (Huntington, 1997). Under such conditions, various social movements, and revolutionary politics are able to interpose with greater force and in lesser time, within this new interactive space, leading to the convergence of the horizontal communication networks and mass media. This has led to an unparalleled shift in history, where the public sphere is fast moving away from the realms of various institutions, to this new space that mainly comprises of mass self-communication, and communication networking, through the Internet and the wireless networking modes (Klinenberg, 2007). This article will examine this new age communication space, and will study to find out how the concept of networks and network society, contribute to the overall understanding of the contemporary media landscape. Discussion What are network societies? During the 20th century, especially after the end of the Cold War era (in 1990s), there has been phenomenal changes in the political, social, cultural and economic dimensions owing to globalisation. Leaving aside the clichéd economic and cultural domains of globalization, a look at the more general changes brought by globalisation (related to ICTs) will give us a broader perspective. In 1992, Jan van Dijk first coined the term ‘network society’ in his book De Netwerkmaatschappij  (van Dijk, 2005), and was later used by Manuel Castells in 1996. Castells analyses this new concept of ‘network society’ and conceptualised that such societies formed owing to certain factors: The creation of the innovative Information and Communication Technology (ICT), and the formation of global computer networks that helped in the global integration. The lowering of communication costs as in transnational transports, making it possible for the global migration to take place. The breakdown of the Berlin wall and the subsequent rise in global capitalism; The rise of various new forms of social movements like the human rights, civil rights, women’s rights, environmental rights, etc., (Castells, and Gustavo, 2005). In an interview, Castells defined the term network society as “a society where the key social structures and activities are organized around electronically processed information networks...Its about social networks which process and manage information and are using micro-electronic based technologies" (History; Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley, 2001). Castells further adds that technology is not the only aspect that defines modern societies, but other factors like economy, culture, and politics also form the framework of network societies, while religion and social status, help in shaping these societies. A network that collectively forms the societies, are actually series of links between basic unitary social elements, known as the nodes. When a single link between two unitary elements is established, the formation of a ‘relationship’ takes place, and many such relationships form a complex web, known as network societies. Van Dijk in his book had delineated "network society" as entity that is framing its relationships within the media networking to replace the traditional form of face-to-face communication. (van Dijk, 1999, 220-223). Van Dijks opines that the modern society is in the process of transforming itself into a network society, implying that Internet is the space where all forms of organizational, interpersonal, and mass communications converge. This image, as envisioned by van Djik, is something that we are already experiencing in the 21st century, where we find that Internet has already turned into the ‘normal media,’ used for commutation and gaining information by a large section of the global society, from all domains of life. Contemporary media and network societies: New media is the concept which theorises that the new processes of communication within the ‘virtual’ world allows small groups to assemble online and sell, share, or exchange goods and information (Castells, and Gustavo, 2005). This is seen in many online portals, like ebay.com or amazon.com (Fig 1). Fig 1: The online ‘shopping’ portal, ‘ebay,’ where the network society can log from any part of the world, and trade through the Internet. This includes buying and selling from almost any part of the world, and thus dispensing off with the traditional practice where the shopper or seller must necessarily come to a common physical marketplace to trade. Here ‘virtual shopping portals’ are replacing the ‘real’ or physical marketplaces. Thus, we find that the new age media is slowly replacing the old traditional form of shopping practice. There are also forums that do not take part in any trade and commerce, but form an online platform where people can speak and voice their opinions amongst the global networking society, as for example, Facebook, Twitter, Orkut, etc. Fig 2: an online forum facebook.com, is a social networking site where people come under a community forum, and are free to interact, play games, and voice their opinions, in almost all socio-political-economic subjects. These are also the places where the various social movements gather steam, with the news spreading rapidly amongst the community members spread across almost every country in the world. The network society within this virtual world is a structure based entirely on network functioning on the ICTs, founded upon digital and micro-electronically created networks that form, process, and disseminate information, based on the knowledge collected within the network nodes. Thus, these societies are distinguishable in terms of a society based on the infrastructure of various social and media networks that allow an organisational mode at all different level (individual, social groups, or organisational communities). The basic unit of the network society in this case is an individual, who is linked by networks, causing scale reduction (decreased working and living environments); and also scale extension (in terms of national and international spread) (Barney, 2004, 1-34). Thus, the scope of the network society is both global and local, and is often termed as “glocal” and it transcends time and location (Hassan, 2004). Within the new media, there are wide varieties of horizontal networks of communication that operate independently from the corporate media and government, and allow mass communication. It has the potential to reach almost the entire world, and individuals or groups are often initiated it by, without making use of the direct media system. The explosion of blogs, streaming and podding, and various other forms of interactive communication, created a new system of worldwide horizontal communication networks, that allowed people to communicate without going through the channels set up by the governmental or other social institutions, thus going beyond the mass media system that once distinguished the developed industrial nations. The immense power generated by the network society was evident recently in the Middle East crises, which we noticed during the early months of 2011. It started with protests in Tunisia where a fruit vendor died after setting himself on fire, protesting against the local authorities. This news was widely circulated amongst the network society through the various social networking forums and other blogging sites, and within a span of few days unrest spread all over the nation, leading to massive protests and soon President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali was forced to flee the country. This revolution then spread to Egypt through the same media Internet, where mass circulations were made against the authoritative government, amongst the network societies in Egypt, leading to a huge revolution against the government, which forced President Hosni Mubarak to resign. The same media Internet again was used to spark protests in many more Middle East countries to fight against various the authoritative governments (The Telegraph, Egypt domino effect: regimes across the region under fire, April 2011). Another very similar incident took place in India in the first week of April 2011. A social activist Mr. Anna Hazare decided to fight against a corruption bill brought in by the Indian government, which in reality was a toothless tiger, created to protect the corrupt ministers. To garner support for Mr. Hazare, the social media sites were used, where various anti-corruption portals were opened to garner support. Within a matter of 1-2 days, the entire civil society became a part of the movement, and the government that had heretofore underestimated the power of network societies, had to back down and meet all demands made by Mr. Hazare. Thus, we find that the network societies in the context of the new media is gradually taking over from the various institutional bodies, and becoming the actual seat of power (IBNlive, Grand welcome arranged in Ralegan for Hazares homecoming, 11th April 2011). Conclusion: From the above discussion, it stands out very clearly that the concept of network societies is an integral part of the new media, and one must have a clear understanding of the functioning of this complex network system, in order to manipulate or use this society for serving certain social causes. Using the ICTs the network societies are slowly turning into a hub of global power, and seems poised to replace the dominion of all governmental and institutions bodies that traditionally have been the chief source of power, until very recently. Bibliography Barney, D., 2004. The Network Society. Cambridge: Polity Press. Castells, M., and Gustavo, C., (eds.), 2005. The Network Society: From Knowledge to Policy. Washington, DC: Johns Hopkins Center for Transatlantic Relations, 3-2. Hassan, R., 2004. Media, Politics, and the Network Society. Glasgow: Bell&Bain Ltd, 8-54. History; Institute of International Studies, UC Berkeley, 2001. The Network Society and Organizational Change, 4-6. Retrieved from, http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people/Castells/castells-con4.html Huntington, S., 1997. The clash of civilizations and the remaking of world order. New York: Simon and Schuster, 19-40. IBNlive, 11th April 2011. Grand welcome arranged in Ralegan for Hazares homecoming, retrieved from http://ibnlive.in.com/generalnewsfeed/news/grand-welcome-arranged-in-ralegan-for-hazares-homecoming/644779.html Klinenberg, E., 2007. Fighting for air: Conglomerates, citizens, and the battle to control Americas media. New York: Henry Holt & Co. R. Robertson, R., 1992. Globalization. London: Sage. Sztompka, P., 1994. The sociology of social change. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. The Telegraph, April 2011. Egypt domino effect: regimes across the region under fire, April 2011. Retrieved from, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/8324501/Egypt-domino-effect-regimes-across-the-region-under-fire.html van Dijk, J., 2005. The Deepening Divide: Inequality in the Information Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. van Dijk, J., 1999. The Network Society. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Weber, L. 2009. Marketing to the social web: how digital customer communities build your business. New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, xi. Read More