Article Critic: Power and Counter – Power in the Network Society by Manuel Castells, The Structure and Dynamics of Global Multi-Media Business Networks by Castells & Arsenault
Power and Counter – Power in the Network Society
Are the public space and media atmosphere shifting from the conventional communication instruments to the new age technological communication spaces? It seems “yes” that for those who take a look at the today’s situation. But this shifting is not that simple which has to be examined properly for whom want to see the things beyond what is happening just under our eyes.
Castells'
2007 work’s -Power and Counter – Power in the Network Society- aim is to show that how this shifting happen and what results it
created in digital age as he thinks that all institutional systems reflect
power relations in any time. He presents some hypotheses in regard to
transformation of power challenges while his approach is defining what power
and counter power are and how they are overlapping in mass-communication and
mass self-communication.
According
to the author, politics is based on socialized communication, on the capacity
to influence people’s minds. To influence people’s minds, most useful apparatus
is the TV if one consider the results of several polls and works related to
public opinion, to be largely taking by the politicians who are deemed as very
much important person by ordinary people. In order to make good impressions on
people, politicians use media politics via TV’s and are harming opponent’s
campaigns by using whatever they can get. All these process works within every
part of the media and society and as a result of this people’s perception of
politics change to a very negative way. In recent years, Eurobarometer, UNDP,
World Values Survey and various polls from Gallup, the Field Institute and the
Pew Institute in the U.S.A. all point toward a significiant level of distrust
of citizens vis – a –vis politicians. The latest Gallup work which has
published by The Economist Magazine in 11/20/2013 has shown up that the only
40% of citizens in the mostly – rich countries of the OECD expressed confidence
in their national governments in 2012, down five percentage points from 2007.
(The drop is big in countries hardest hit by recession: more than 20 percentage
points in Greece, Ireland and Portugal)
When we get back to author’s division called mass media
and mass self – communication, we can see the bilateral behiaviours of media
businesses. The great media
conglomerates are also investing in social network areas, as the case of Rupert
Murdoch’s NewsCorp acquired Myspace clearly shows that. Merging old and new
media companies emerges another consolidation problem which we have already
known from the old media ownership structures. But, author says that the
process of consolidation between old and new media is not inevitable. There is
something like a tendency toward smaller less commercial networking sites by
young people and it creates a different type of resistance against
conglomerates.
In addition to changing ownership structures and merging
new and old media companies, there is another effect related to control
authority handover. At first, Professional journalists hold this authority
position behalf of the media institution as a whole but this position no longer
keep in by the journalists but by the consumer’s itself. This changed media
environment has created new opportunities for the public to enter and interpret
the political world. It also changes the way of politicians practice upon the
public and also the other way round.
As
a conclusion, author argues that societies evolve and change by deconstruction
their institutions under the pressure of new power relationships and
constructing new sets of institutions that allow people to live side by side
without self – destroying, in spite of their contradictory interests and
values. The future will shape under the realm of new media and humankind’s
struggle to free their minds is never ends.
The Structure and Dynamics of Global Multi-Media Business Networks
Arsenault’s
and Castells’ s 2008 work -The Structure and Dynamics of Global Multi-Media Business Networks- focuses on merely the business structure of media
environment which dominated by seven great conglomerates in USA. Today, they
argue that the media operate, by and large, according to a business-logic
regardless of their legal status. Their definition of mass communication and
mass self- communcation is also takes part in their work.
Their
work generated some points such as media ownership is increasingly
concentrated, media conglomerates are able to deliver a diversity of products
over one platform as well as one product over a diversity of platforms, this
fluid movement of communication products across platforms encourages the
customization and segmentation of audiences in order to maximize advertising
revenues. And finally, these success of these strategies is determined by the
ability of internal media Networks to achieve optimal economies of synergy that
take advantage of the changing communications environment.
As a conclusion, authors say that
“The digitization of cultural production and distribution, under the conditions
of globalization and deregulation, has ushered in several simultaneous trends.
Media content is both diversified and globalized. […] the global shapes the
local but the local also influences the local. “ All of these works finally
confirm that the commodification of mediated culture and the subordination of
all forms of commodification to profit making in the market place. Most of the
media Networks interconneted between other sectors of the economy, such as
finance, banking, advertising, technology,research etc. Through multiple
switches. The global corporate business shapes much of the areas that we deal
with but many of the individuals are trying to find enough space to escaping
from them. The new media creates new opportunities due to free people and gives
them something to create on their own spaces.
Yorumlar
Yorum Gönder