Chapter 7-13 Notes PDF

Chapter 7 -- Mobilities ======================= - Highlights mobilities centrality in contemporary society - Builds on Manuel Castells\' idea of the \"network society\" to emphasize flows not just of info but also of people, products, & ideas. - Mobilities theorists argue that this...

Chapter 7 -- Mobilities ======================= - Highlights mobilities centrality in contemporary society - Builds on Manuel Castells\' idea of the \"network society\" to emphasize flows not just of info but also of people, products, & ideas. - Mobilities theorists argue that this concept encapsulates the dynamics of globalization & technological advancements shaping modern life. **Introduction** - Mobilities extend beyond info flows to include people, products, & ideas. - Examples of globalized production processes (e.g., the Apple supply chain) illustrate mobility of goods & processes. - Mobilities theorists explore how tech like ICT infrastructure support & accelerate flows​ **Types of Mobilities** - Info: Global exchange of info. - Products: Products designed, manufactured, & distributed globally. - People: Movement through commuting, tourism, migration. - Ideas & Identities: Spread & transformation of cultures & identities. **Mobilities of People** - The movement of people is a defining feature of contemporary society. - Categories include commuting, tourism, migration, & imaginative mobility - virtual experiences of distant places). - Mobility connects w/ cultural exchange - individuals carry ideas & identities across spaces **Technological Determinism** - Mobilities thinkers critique tech determinism - emphasize human choices shape tech impacts - Social factors: Inequalities & Access; Cultural Norms & Values; Changing Social Relations - Economic factors: Globalization of Economies; Labor Market Changes; Tech Access & Economic Inequality - E.g. online dating, which, while facilitated by ICT, relies on broader societal changes such as increased geographical mobility **Time-Space Compression** - Describes how tech advancements (transport & communication) shrink perceived distances between places & allow global coordination in real time. - Intro of unified time systems (Greenwich Mean Time) & innovations (air travel & internet) smooth & predictable interactions across vast distances. - Castells emphasizes this compression fosters a \"24/7\" culture -- even shopping changes **Flow & Scapes** - John Urry: Mobilities of people, products, info flow through "scapes." - Scapes (landscape): - Ethnoscape: global flow of people (migrants, refugees, tourists & workers) who move across borders - Technoscape: global movement of tech -- machinery & infrastructure to software & IT - Financescape: flow of capital across borders -- investments, currency exchange & stock markets - Mediascape: global distribution of media & info through news, entertainment, & social media. - Ideoscape: global spread of ideas, ideologies, & values - linked to political ideologies, human rights, democracy & freedom. - Highlights the ease of movement via various channels - Corporeal Travel: Physical presence remains essential - Virtual & physical mobilities complement each other - NB changes: interconnectedness & fluidity; impacts social life (how communicate & act) - Critical Perspective on Mobilities: - draws attention to the complexities & inequalities inherent in these flows - Not all individuals/groups have equal access to these scapes - Barriers to scapes: economic inequality, political restrictions & tech limits affect one's ability to navigate them **Networked Individualization** - Describes how individuals are increasingly connected thru personalized networks rather than being embedded in traditional, group-based communities - Barry Wellman\'s concept of \"networked individualization\" highlights how modern mobility fosters selective & personalized social networks. - door-to-door; place-to-place; person-to-person. - interaction shifts: community-based \> individual-focused. - Transition from localized communities to global, digitally mediated networks underpins shift​ - Digital & physical networks provide tailored social connections. - Promotes a personalized approach to social engagement. **Mobilisation** - Mobilities explores how digital networks impact political & social mobilization. - Wellman connects networked individualisation to modern political engagement, where individuals align w/ specific issues or movements rather than committing to broad ideological platforms. - New media = virtual political participation - often no depth & sustained commitment - Encourages selective & issue-based political involvement - This \"personalisation of collective behaviour\" facilitates rapid organisation & participation but may result in superficial engagement, often referred to as \"slacktivism\"​ **Critiques of Mobilities** 1. Lack of Explanatory Power - Mobilities provide descriptive insights but fail to explain the underlying causes of change. - W/out explanation, mobilities cannot guide future societal developments​. 2. Focus on Immobilities - Bryan Turner critiques the concept for ignoring immobilities (e.g., restricted mobility of the poor or marginalized) - Need to study immobilities alongside mobilities 3. Inequalities created by restricted mobility - Gated communities & surveillance measures highlight how mobility is unequally distributed​​. - Need more attention to those excluded from the benefits of mobility 4. Surveillance & Security - Didier Bigo links mobility w/ increased surveillance & control, restricting movement for some while facilitating it for others​. 5. Overemphasis on Virtual Networks - Critics argue that virtual connections cannot replace physical interactions, which remain crucial for meaningful relationships & community-building​. **Conclusion** - Mobilities framework offers a compelling lens to view globalization & interplay of tech & society - Limitations (NB: explanatory depth & the neglect of immobilities) = it is more descriptive than prescriptive - Further integration w/ theories of inequality & social structures is needed to fully understand the dynamics of mobility in the modern world Chapter 8 -- Info & the Market System: Herbert Schiller ======================================================= - Schiller provides critical Marxian analysis of the info revolution - Argues it is not a break from the past but a continuation of capitalist development. - Examine how info technologies (ICTs) & media systems are shaped by capitalist imperatives, emphasizing profit, corporate control & the reinforcement of class inequalities. **Background: The Info Explosion** - Since the 1990s, ICTs have grown at an unprecedented rate = global networks capable of real-time, high-volume info flow. - By 2012, most people in Europe & the U.S. had internet access. - Despite these tech advances, core priorities of capitalism---profit & corporate control---remain unchanged. **Key Concepts & Questions** 1. **Marxist vs. Marxian Approach**: - Marxist: Activist-oriented & focused on political change. - Marxian: Analytical framework used to critique & explain capitalism's structural mechanisms 2. **Schiller's Framework of 3 Pillars**: - Structural analysis: Examines the underlying features of media & info systems. - Political economy: Highlights how capitalism shapes ICT development. - Historical evidence: Tracks trends over time to contextualize technological changes. 3. **Central Questions**: - Who controls ICTs & for whose benefit? - What opportunities are created or denied? - What interests drive technological innovations, & w/ what consequences? **Marxian Views on Info & Capitalism** - The info revolution strengthens, rather than disrupts, capitalist structures. - Techno-capitalism positions ICTs as central to production, control &profit maximization. - Class inequalities determine access to info, benefiting elites while marginalizing poorer populations. - Info is critical to maintaining capitalist systems, reinforcing established power dynamics. **Political Economy of Info** - **Ownership & Commodification**: - Media platforms & info systems are owned & controlled by a small number of corporations. - Info is treated as a commodity, shaped by profit motives rather than public good. - Commodification: info as commodity; market-driven production; class inequalities; private interests -- all play role in how & commodified - **Systemic Analysis**: - NB in understanding how info is controlled & commodified in a capitalist system - Focuses on ownership, profit motives & the influence of corporate interests. - **Historical Perspective**: - ICTs evolve to meet the needs of different phases of capitalism, particularly in supporting corporate & military priorities. **Commodification of Info** - Info is created & distributed based on its potential for profit, much like consumer goods. - Class inequalities dictate who has access to quality info & services. - Corporate interests dominate, marginalizing public concerns & prioritizing market-driven goals. - Content is shaped by who owns media platforms. - Info must be viewed w/in the context of capitalist systems. - Info is bought, sold & valued like any other commodity. - ICTs evolve in line w/ the needs of different phases of capitalism. - Corporate control ensures info primarily serves profit motives not public interests. - For example, the internet & associated platforms develop features that serve corporate advertising rather than public access to critical info. **Corporate Capitalism & Media Oligopolies** - A few transnational corporations dominate global info flows = priorities shape the info domain. - ICTs align w/ corporate needs, focusing on advertising, global branding, & consumerism. - Media ownership concentration leads to oligopolies that control what content is produced & how it is distributed. - Privatization & deregulation further entrench corporate interests, sidelining public welfare. **Lauderdale Paradox** - When resources like info are made available only through market mechanisms, some groups are excluded due to cost barriers. - Exclusion weakens societal cohesion, particularly as work, banking, education, & democratic participation increasingly depend on universal info access. - Schiller critiques this trend, noting its erosion of the public good in favour of private profit. **Military-Industrial Complex** - Schiller highlights the role of the military in advancing capitalist objectives. The military-industrial complex supports & protects global capitalism through investments in ICTs. - Technologies like satellites & communication systems are developed to serve military & corporate needs, aligning public research & development (R&D) w/ private profit. **The Spread of Corporate Power** - Transnational corporations use ICTs to coordinate global activities, prioritize deregulation, & push privatization to serve their goals. - Media platforms increasingly function to support advertising & consumer behaviour, ensuring corporate profits while marginalizing alternative voices. - Deregulation to shape media & info systems for corporate benefit. - Privatization of IT infrastructure serves corporate goals - **Media as Ideological Control** - Media content promotes capitalist ideologies, reinforcing consumerism & cultural imperialism. - Platforms like Google & Facebook offer free services but monetize user data, turning users into commodities. - American media dominance spreads capitalist values globally, shaping perceptions & behaviours to align w/ market priorities. - Media's role: - Media platforms for marketing. - Sensationalist content (click baiting). - Global reach of American media & values. - Ideological control & consumerism. - Profit & ideology work in tandem - According to Schiller tech is not neutral; its artefacts bear the impress of market values - what were the priorities of the corporate suppliers at the R&D stage? **The Info Revolution & Capitalist Stability** - Schiller challenges the notion that the info revolution has created a new society, arguing instead that it reinforces capitalist stability. - ICTs are developed based on profitability rather than social good, further embedding market values in the info landscape. - The rise of techno-capitalism demonstrates how info has become a cornerstone of capitalist control, rather than a tool for democratization. **Critiques of Schiller\'s Framework** 1. **Overemphasis on Corporate Dominance**: - Critics suggest Schiller underestimates the role of grassroots movements & individual agency in shaping the info landscape. 2. **Economic Determinism**: - Schiller's focus on economic structures is seen as overlooking cultural & technological factors that also influence ICTs. 3. **Limited Scope**: - By focusing on corporate capitalism, Schiller may neglect the role of non-market forces in shaping technological & info systems. **Conclusion** - Herbert Schiller provides a compelling critique of the so-called \"Info Society,\" arguing that it reflects & reinforces capitalist imperatives. - The commodification of info, corporate control, & class inequalities are defining features of this system. - Schiller's critics argue for a more nuanced approach that considers cultural & individual dynamics alongside economic structures. Schiller's work remains a vital framework for understanding the interplay between info & capitalism. Chapter 9 - Info & Democracy 1: Jürgen Habermas, the Public Sphere, & Public Service Institutions ================================================================================================= - This chapter critically examines the interplay between info & democracy - Draws on Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere. - Explores the challenges posed by media manipulation, disinfo, & infotainment, which threaten civic engagement & the democratic process. - Analyse he role of public service institutions (PSIs) in preserving democratic discourse alongside critiques of Habermas's framework. **Introduction: Democracy & Info** - Democracy relies on a well-informed electorate to enable active participation & accountability. - Media manipulation, disinfo, & infotainment undermine informed decision-making, leading to what is described as a \"democratic deficit.\" - This deficit manifests as disengagement, apathy, & superficial public discourse, raising questions about the effectiveness of info systems in modern democracies. **The Public Sphere: Jürgen Habermas\'s Framework** - A space for rational-critical debate - Free from church, state, or market interference - Space where public opinion could form 1. **Historical Emergence** - The public sphere arose in 18th- & 19th-century Europe as a space for rational-critical debate, free from interference by the state, church, or market. - It was fuelled by early capitalism, press freedom, & expanding literacy, w/ venues like coffeehouses & newspapers fostering public discussion. - Habermas viewed this development as integral to deliberative democracy, where public opinion is formed through reasoned debate. 2. **Rational-Critical Debate** - Public sphere was intended to ensure open, inclusive dialogue based on reason, divorced from private interests. - This debate was seen as foundational for democratic processes, enabling citizens to critique power structures & shape governance. 3. **Decline & Refeudalization** - In the era of late capitalism, the public sphere has been eroded by the commercialization of mass media. - Media outlets increasingly prioritize advertising, spectacle, & entertainment over rational discourse. - This shift, which Habermas calls \"refeudalization,\" undermines the critical function of the public sphere, replacing debate w/ manipulated consensus & superficial engagement. **Public Service Institutions (PSIs) - Essential** 1. **Role in Supporting Democracy** - PSIs like libraries, museums, & public broadcasters were created to preserve spaces for rational debate & access to trustworthy info. - maintain spaces for rational debate & trustworthy information - These institutions aim to counterbalance the commercial media's focus on profit & sensationalism. 2. **Challenges** - PSIs face significant pressures from: - **Technological Change**: Digital platforms often outpace traditional institutions in reach & accessibility. - **Socio-Economic Trends**: Privatization & reduced funding compromise their ability to serve the public. - **Political Opposition**: Efforts to curtail their independence & autonomy weaken their democratic function. - These trends risk rendering PSIs outdated & ineffective in the modern info ecosystem. **Contemporary Implications** - Positive: Expansion of access (internet, social media) - Negative: fragmentation (echo chambers?) - info overload, misinformation - commercialization - surveillance & manipulation **Digital Media & Expanded Access** - Optimists argue that the internet & social media democratize access to discourse, allowing marginalized voices to participate & fostering a \"global public sphere.\" - Examples include movements like the Arab Spring & \#MeToo, which leveraged digital platforms for activism. **Fragmentation & Echo Chambers** - Digital platforms also fragment discourse, creating echo chambers - Limits exposure to differing viewpoints - E.g. algorithms reinforce confirmation bias by prioritizing familiar content - Social media exacerbates information overload & spread of misinformation - Habermas's emphasis on reliable information for public debate - E.g. the impact of fake news during elections & pandemic - Social media platforms prioritize profit over public good, incentivizing sensationalist & divisive content to maximize engagement. - Surveillance capitalism enables data harvesting for micro-targeting, as seen in scandals like Cambridge Analytica, where user data was exploited for political manipulation. - The public sphere has fragmented into multiple, often competing, digital spaces. - Influencers & entertainment-driven content dominate attention, reducing focus on meaningful discourse. - Habermas's concerns about capitalism\'s impact on media & democracy are amplified in the digital age. - Rise of surveillance capitalism: personal data is harvested to influence behaviour - Exploited by political actors & corporations for micro-targeting - E.g. the Cambridge Analytica scandal showed how data manipulation influenced elections - Potential for digital deliberation on internet? - Platforms could foster collaboration & reasoned debate across viewpoints - E.g. Reddit & Wikipedia has open debate built into its architecture - The public sphere might be obsolete in the digital age - Public discourse is fragmented, commodified, & manipulated - Multiple, competing spheres replace the unified public sphere - influencers & celebrity-driven content shifts focus to entertainment - Social media offers both opportunities & challenges for the public sphere - fragmentation, misinformation, commercialization, & manipulation - Habermas's concerns about media & capitalism are magnified in the age of social media **Critiques of Habermas's Public Sphere** 1. **Historical Limitations** - Critics argue that the public sphere Habermas idealized was never fully inclusive, often excluding women, minorities, & the working class. - Parallel spaces, like the \"plebeian public sphere,\" existed but were marginalized. 2. **Overemphasis on Rationality** - Focus on rational-critical debate criticized for sidelining emotional & narrative forms of engagement, which are also valid ways of participating in democracy. 3. **Corporate & Professional Dominance** - The dominance of corporate media & professional interests undermines the accessibility & authenticity of public discourse. - Infotainment & partisan news exacerbate the erosion of rational debate. **Potential for Deliberative Democracy** - Despite its challenges, digital platforms offer opportunities for new forms of deliberative democracy: - Platforms like Reddit & Wikipedia demonstrate potential for collaborative & reasoned debate. - However, their success depends on overcoming issues like fragmentation, commercialization, & manipulation. **Conclusion** - Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere provides a powerful framework for analysing the relationship between info & democracy - While its decline threatens democratic processes, public service institutions & digital platforms offer potential solutions - PSIs & digital platforms face significant challenges from commercialisation, fragmentation, & political pressures - To address the \"democratic deficit,\" there must be a renewed focus on fostering inclusive, rational, & independent spaces for public discourse. Chapter 10 - Friedrich von Hayek, Info & Democracy 2 ==================================================== **Background** - Habermasians: democracy requires well-informed electorate, but manipulation of info = decline in public sphere - Marxist principles become part of infoal domain - manipulation in info channels - State must fund public broadcasting & news; ensure access to good info - Hayekians: institutions of liberty require free-market economy. Markey more NB than public sphere 4 democracy - \"State leave me alone\" - Institutions of liberty, not democracy - Habermas has wrong - not informed electorate, need free electorate, decide for selves  **Chapter summary** - Inadequacies of state intervention - Market better at providing info than state - States in charge of economies &b info went bankrupt - Have to build walls to keep in citizens = problem - Capitalism (despite flaws) inherently meets peeps info needs & can be seen as info system - Wrote in 1945 when SU only just started - wrote before even proof of failure - Wrote on theoretical grounds; empirically now proven right - Capitalism best way to see & provide who needs what - Democracy does not require state-supported info infrastructures (or public sphere) - Capitalism alone essential for democracy - Fukuyama: democracy does not require public sphere - but leads to fragmentation of society  **Capitalism as an Info Society** - Heart of argument: whether order is imposed/emerges by itself - Hayek\'s view: market is efficient, decentralised info system - Price mechanism = info signals between economic agents - Centralised state planning = inefficient & harmful compared to free market - Markets align individual needs w/ economic activity, creating an \"info society\" - \"Catallaxy\": self-organising process by which order emerges in complex adaptive system - Aquinas: when there is order, the order is imposed - Dawkins: *The Blind watchmaker* takes issue w/ need designer/imposer of order - Today: complexity thinking: any system w/ interacting parts is rich, non-linear & follows simple rule - Order is not made, order is emergent - Hobbs: order is imposed - *the Leviathan* - if we don\'t have a government, life would be nasty, brutish & short - Gov big monster - but good cos keeps people in check - Complexity theorists see economy as good adaptive system - - The market is an info system: each individual makes decision - do I need this? Can I afford this? - Don\'t need to know entire economy - only make decision in small situation - Info required is dispersed, available locally, on individual transaction level, very little needed - 1950s Stalinist system - have central planner who must sign off on everything; no local knowledge - Made to plan even in bad weather & don't get paid enough - Hayek said if leave to farmer - sort self out - No way for central planner to outperform ordinary decisions that housewives make - In market economy - price is signal for availability - In planned economy - signal for availability is the queue for tomatoes - too long = few - Central/state-planned can have good intentions: on systems level = inefficient & harmful - State interventions on free market - tax, packaging, etc - makes ineffective; added rules puts brake son efficient mechanism - distorts catallaxy - Hayek sees the market mechanism as neutral. - According to Hayek the market is the easiest way (perhaps the only feasible way) to determine needs & wants of people. - Past a certain point of complexity it becomes impossible to efficiently plan centrally. - Complexity theory background to Hayekian thinking: Self-organization by many agents each acting on local information according to simple rules. This leads to emergent patterns in the system. **The Use of Knowledge in Society** - Centralised economic planning fails cos can\'t effectively gather & use all dispersed knowledge in society - Can do in simple society - not now; Singapore can, not USA - Dispersed knowledge: knowledge about local conditions preferences & resources if held by agents locally but richly dispersed across millions of agents - Everyone does own groceries; add all up = creates economy - Emergent order: interaction of supply & demand influencing behaviour of many agents all acting in local knowledge facilitates natural, decentralised coordination of resources - Has vision for non-static thing; movement & from movement emerges order - Price system = efficient allocation of resources, solving prob of dispersed knowledge w/out centralised control **Failings of State Intervention** - State intervention has historic record of inefficiency & failure - When Berlin wall came down saw stagnation that had occurred; now room for growth - Centrally-planned economy = gov decides what you need, not you - Collectivism leads to oppression almost everywhere - Ineffectiveness of state intervention in economic & informational domain - Free market economies more innovative & improved standards of living **Liberty** - Hayek: government intervention threatens individual liberty - freedom from (e.g. poverty) & freedom to (make own decisions) - Market freedom is aligned w/ freedom from interference - Concerns over inequality are secondary to protecting individual freedoms - State policies aimed at reducing inequality often restrict other personal freedoms (e.g. taxation, school access, employment) - Unintended consequences of well-intended policies by the welfare state. - Public Libraries & Universities - State-run informational institutions historically benefit elites more than the poor - Libraries primarily serve middle-class users despite being tax funded - Universities are dominated by the professional classes, limiting true meritocracy - Market mechanisms, such as private bookstores or online services (Amazon, MOOCs), - offer better universal access to information **Disintermediation & Neo-Hayekians** Disintermediation: lay people can participate in information production w/out - experts or gatekeepers (w/out intermediaries) - Internet platforms (e.g., Wikipedia, blogs) as disintermediation - Wikipedia as an example: collective knowledge surpasses traditional expert-driven encyclopaedias - The "wisdom of crowds" (crowdsourcing) & open participation as central tenets of neo-Hayekian thought **The Market & Democracy** - Hayek privileges the market over democratic politics in ensuring liberty - Democracy is viewed sceptically due to the tendency of politicians to interfere w/ markets (and liberty) - Democratic politics oversimplify individual needs & lead to market distortions - Critique of public service institutions (e.g., BBC) as elitist & detached from market mechanisms **Francis Fukuyama** - Capitalism sustains liberal democracy (the public sphere is not essential) - Market society provides individual freedoms BUT weakens social cohesion (e.g., trust, authority, community) - Information Society promotes individualism, leading to social fragmentation - Unlike Hayek, Fukuyama seeks to restore social order in a more cohesive Information Society - Quote: "Fukuyama is left bemoaning the absence of alternative ideas for social change to the neo-liberalism that lavishly rewards the extremely rich & appears to abandon much of the remainder of the populace **Conclusion** - Hayek & the neo-Hayekians offer a compelling critique of state intervention & a robust defence of market mechanisms as efficient information systems - Arguments are challenged by the realities of inequality, corporate dominance, & the complexities of the digital age. - While capitalism may foster innovation & liberty, its capacity to sustain democracy w/out state support remains a contentious issue. - Highlights the need for a balanced approach that recognizes both the strengths & limitations of market-driven information Chapter 11 - Information, reflexivity and surveillance: Anthony Giddens ======================================================================= - British sociologist, influential in recasting social theory - Known for structuration theory & role on 3rd Way politics - Famous cos politicians used ideas; PhD critique of 3 classical sociologists - just read them & critiqued - No empirical work - Major focus: critique of capitalism & industrialism as explanation for modernity - Not dealing w/ Giddens, but words Webster puts in his mouth  **Key Concepts:** - Reflexivity - from Ulrich Beck - Disembedding - from Karl Polanyi - Individuation - Surveillance - from Foucault - War - from Spencer  **Theoretical Legacy** - Classical theorists: Marx, Durkheim & Weber - Giddens thinks explanations of modernity (capitalism, industrialism, rationalisation) correct but incomplete - They think they\'re explaining these things, but all trying to really explain rise of modern times - Capitalism & industrialism are dominant in modern times - Rationalisation = bureaucracy will be dominant cos so efficient - rational, legal organisation - Euphemism for destroying things - close uni departments cos of money issues - Streamlining it - Very efficient - Overlooked modernity is driven by info (surveillance) & violence (war) - They all missed modernity\'s main forces - Info & violence closely connected - to beat/subjugate/tax someone know about them & their tactics/income - A state is an organisation/institution that achieves monopoly on violence in area to extract resources from people  **Nation State, Violence & Surveillance** - Nation-state: built on war & violence; surveillance essential for state power - Nation-states came about from violence - Peace of Westphalia to end wars - established nation-states to stop it - Built on war & violence - Rely on war for outside & surveillance for inside - War - built on Spencer\'s ideas - Violence - Fukho - Information Societies: nation-states rely on gathering & controlling info to maintain sovereignty - Morally, for Giddens, no difference between gang & state - Gang most violent = rule an area - State uses police to enforce law, monopoly on violence - Modern state is super-gang; if well run state = no gangs other than gov - Info war: shift from industrial warfare to info warfare - Key features: intelligence, media management, \"smart\" weapons, cyberwarfare - Role of media: symbolic struggles for public opinion, constant media coverage - Gulf War prime example of how to minimise losses - nearly done all from air - Symbolic Struggles: - Media in War - govs manage public perception thru media - Israeli defence force not allow journalists - New media: global, digital & instant media transform how wars perceived - Almost don\'t need journalists - Surveillance & National Defence: - Previously wars run on military intelligence - Giddens says pervasive - may be actors on inside who sympathise - Global surveillance: systems like Echelon gather massive amounts of data for national defense - Internal surveillance: nation-states monitor potential threats to security - France watches Islamic communities/individuals closely - Pg 295 - 5th column - Human Rights Regimes: - Globalisation & humjan rights: growing awareness of human rights - Voters push gov to intervene in other countries - E.g. allies OG in Afghanistan to remove Al-qaeda - help women, now back to square 1 - Interventions: international involvement in conflicts over human rights abuses - Giddens doesn\'t say good/bad - effect of information set-up  **Citizenship & surveillance** - SA citizenship info stolen from gov database - risk about info collected about peeps - Civil liberation concerns: misuse of personal data & linked databases - Fukho Panopticon Metaphor: only need 1 warden who sits where can see into all cells in prison - Prisoners don\'t know if watching - surveillance & uncertainty about if being watched or not = behave correctly - Modern surveillance is widespread but also necessary for managing society  **Nation State as Info Society** - Modern society Info society since inception - Generation of state power presumes reflexively gathering, storage & control of info - applied to admin ends - Need calendars & time - maybe why Islamic golden age before EU - Info gathering worse under state - Giddens: live in era of accelerated modernity - not new info age - critiques idea entered info era - Historical roots of info systems extend deep into development of modern society - Tech we see today is symptom, not cause - not changing society - state likes to use tech for its massive info gathering  **Control** - Modern society is highly organised & systemically controlled - Surveillance necessary for organising modern social institutions - Reflexive modernity: life is increasingly shaped by info & individual choices - Because of complexity, modern society = increasingly fragile - need to manage risks = reflexivity - You asses world around you, think about what actions do & adjust behaviour as result - Manechian - followers of prophet Manni & believed universe controlled between struggle of light & dark - St Augustine denounced them, yet one as child - to opposing forced, light must win for Catholics - Giddens says surveillance is like manechism, good & bad **Reflexivity & Choice** - Modernity involves heightened reflexivity - constant gathering of info to make decisions - Life is increasingly disembedded from trad contexts like community & nature - Made possible due to surveillance & control - Some see as disenchantment process - rationalisation destroys this - Idea of noble-savage - Giddens not argue for that, had to do certain things or else would die - Lose community & embedding in nature, loosed of expectations - but consequence is surveillance - Decision-making today vis based on info & risk assessment  **Paradoxes of Modernity** - Paradox is urban societies being more socially organised than communal-based modes of life, must gather extremely detailed knowledge about publics in order to function - Individuation vs Individuality - Now can never be forgotten - digital record - finances, birth record, death record - Cities bring personal freedoms but also increased institutional surveillance - More individuality than ever before - don't have to worry about opinions of neighbours - more separated - Become more individuationised- they keep records about you personally - Feel are freer & can live out individuality, can do what want w/out neighbours looking over shoulders - More individuation: many orgs collect info about us; premodern time gossip stopped after time - Now have permanent record - finance, ID number, things in cloud - Free of constraints of nature - import produce - but cost is surveillance - People in EU want to make laws to improve situation Chapter 12 - Information and Postmodernity ========================================== - Relationship between info & postmodernity - Postmodernist thinkers incredulous towards \"grand narratives\" of Truth, Beauty & Justice - primacy legacy of the enlightenment - Modernism cultural movement that rose w/ modernity - Enlightenment was rise of modernity & evidence-based decision making - People subscribed to modernity = powerful & colonised rest of world - Weber said people who understand science & modernity will obliterate all other forms cos so much more efficient - Enlightenment was liberating force from being kept in dark by religious & imperialist values - Traditional authority is nonsense - Promised things like: - Access to truth - science - Beauty - art is not just by church - justice -not god-ordained law/ruler - can have legal system 2 protect from state, democracy - Progressive - End of WW2 - Hiroshima & Nagasaki - France said sold dream of progress - Actually gave biggest war in history, what did progress actually do - destroyed planet & enviro - Modernist ideas about progress didn\'t deliver **All Background for postmodern thinkers** - Modernist thinkers gave \"grand narratives\" of Truth, Beauty & Justice - primacy legacy of the enlightenment - Destroyed local cultures, economies, local ways of life - New argument - modernists are now on side of power & should be criticised - They (intellectuals) now decide truth, beauty & justice - like church did - Postmodernists don\'t like people who think that they already know - Jean Baudrillard, Jean-François Lyotard, Mark Poster, David Harvey - Everything is just opinion, not fact - they think this is freeing - People fear them for relativism - Postmodernists think they are good cos don\'t tell you wat to think - Focus on explosion of meanings - science/info - can celebrate all extra information - So many possibilities for meaning; focus on subjective interpretation rather than singular meaning - Focus on individuals lived experience - Postmodernity is epoch/era - break w/ modernity - Postmodernism is cultural & intellectual movement that rejects modernism - Cultural postmodernism focus on aesthetics - Intellectual postmodernism: critique of science, politics & grand narratives - not so easy to say this is fact - Science itself is a grand narrative - Incredulity towards grand narratives; progress is a grand narrative - use deconstruction - Modernity relies on grand narratives to legitimise things - but just stories, deconstruct truths - All narratives look like religious narratives that enlightenment rejected - Knowledge & power connection - Knowledge is tool of power, keeps people in place - Not a single truth, is contextual, works for now, can be seen in different way tomorrow - Relativism & plurality (difference) - World of different meanings **Social characteristics:** - Reject cultural norms & authority - Monogamy may not be right; celebrate alternative lifestyles - Celebration of \"difference\" for difference sake - Sensory pleasure over \"higher\" meaning - Modernism took out fun from living - Life has no meaning - find own meaning & add it to lies ourselves - Have fun/make own meaning - meaning is to be made, not discovered **Baudrillard: Signs & Simulations** - Simulacra (copy of something) & Simulation - Meaning depends on how well signifier shows signified - Understanding linguistics is not from signifier to signified; rather how signs refer to each other, language works cos of difference between signifiers, not those they signify - Baudrillard says signifiers just relate to other signifiers, not outside that, language doesn\'t exist beyond words - meaning is eternally deferred - 1st step of Simulacra is making map of campus - copy is distorted - copies get luves of their onw - News story will exagerate things; adverts make something better than is - Hyper-reality - The representation of real thing yet completely detached from real thing - The real experience now is the onscreen experience, not in-person - World of spectacle - everything is onscreen - Collapse of meaning - Cultural effect is know its fake but go with it anyway - Self-referential sites = collapse of meaning cos don\'t refer to anything out of signs itself - Can\'t go through looking-glass or reach meaning - just enjoy, can\'t ever be real - Ideologies of modernity - Consumerism, nationalism, etc - thrive in conditions of hyper-reality **Gianni Vattimo on Media & Multiplicity** - Claims explosion of media challenges trad ideas of truth, replacing w/ multiple viewpoints & reality - Multiplicity = fragmentation of media - Media decentralises info - Gives voice to minorities - Promoted tolerance for diversity - But also creates confusion - Too many meanings = become paralysed, can\'t make sense of it all - Equivocality (equal voices) - too many voices can paralyse you - Concept of weak thought: - If lose notion of singular truth, can still; make claims but do it humbly - from my point of view... - Sees at good think, liberating **Mark Poster\'s Mode of Info:** - Distinguishes 3 modes of comm - Oral society: fixed & communal - Written society: rational, individualistic & representational - Electronic society: info is fluid, decentralised & simulated - No longer passive consumers - active consumers of media so construct own identity - Fragmentation of self: personal identity unstable & shaped by mediated experience - We are a parliament of self - different actions in different contexts - Active participation in media fragments identity, unstable - Upside is freedom to become who want to be - Downside is have to curate identity all the time **Conclusion:** - Postmodernism questions validity of modernist thought, offering world where authenticity, truth & meaning collapse into multiple interpretations - Postmodernists argue signs dominate interactions, creating fragmented, playful & information-driven society - Postmodernists: not case of anything goes; it is like language - anything s=doesn\'t go or won\'t be understood, but can play around & don\'t have to say in way others would - Poets help see world in way wouldn\'t have before - What is possible in one community is not possible in other communities Chapter 13 - Beyond the Information Society =========================================== - Information Society theories oversimplify change - tech-determinist - Continuity & change - Webster: informational trends not transformative but extensions of existing systems. i.e. capitalism - Doesn't change society as whole - Giddens & Shulick: different but just makes OG drivers of society stronger - Castells: changes experiences of life; accelerates capitalism & globalisation - Bell: changes everything so much that need new axial principles to understand society - Why did Webster write book: - Seems to be interested in Information Society; yet end of book seems to think just continuation of society like Giddens - Main criticism is lot of metrics used to find if in Information Society are arbitrary & tech-determinist - Not break in society/revolution - is change but that of continuity - Not epoch-making changes - not really moving like neolithic to agriculture & agriculture to industrial - Still industrial - info accelerates things, speeds up life, not totally different life - Info trends don\'t change everything, just new phase in existing things - ideology uses new tools available - Key Points by Webster: - Capitalism shapes info trends more than tech - don\'t need new discipline - Public institutions provide crucial non-commercial info - Habermas wrote about; BBC still NB role - Surveillance serves complex roles, supporting both security & transparency - ambiguous\] - Makes world safer - lose privacy - Globalisation spreads capitalist principles worldwide thru tech - Avoid technological determinism, rather focus on historical & social context - Need complex, multifactor explanations - not all down to tech - Democracy & Information - NB for Giddens, Shiller & Habermas - More info alone doesn\'t guarantee an informed citizenry - NB condition but not enough - Social media helps but does not replace political engagement - Surveillance serves dual role: invasive & accountability-promoting - Media & Marketing Forces: - Info dominates because made more profitable: entertainment made w/ purpose to sell = decline in quality - Media content shaped by market priorities, not diversity - Public institutions like BBC offer higher-quality info - have to do at loss w/ taxpayer money - Surveillance & globalisation: - Surveillance: permanents feature, can\'t go back; vital for security & transparency in democracy - Globalisation: driven by capitalist expansion; enforces market principles across world - Technological determinism: - Webster rejects - is a driver of change, not primary driver - People drawn to single factor explanations, but more complicated than that - Oversimplifies change - Social values & historical forces shape how tech is used - The Public sphere: - Public service institutions: - Libraries, public broadcasting still critical - not commercialised - Under market pressure, still resist - Defend non-commercial - Has role of public sphere weakened? - Scholars liked by Webster: predate tech era - Herbert Schiller: capitalism drives info trends - Anthony Giddens: info shaped by state institutions - Manuel Castells: Global network & power in info age - Not being asked if moving into Information Society - ask rather why capitalism is producing phase of tech acceleration - Main Takeaway: - Info developments are continuous long-term trends in capitalism & governance - Tech changes NB, but don\'t signal radical new social order - Anti-tech determinist; not complete social constructivist; instrumentalist - tech neutral, can use for good/bad