Difference between revisions of "Nancy K. Baym & danah boyd (2012): Socially Mediated Publicness: An Introduction, Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56:3,320-329"
Lombanaphd (Talk | contribs) (Created page with "Digital and networked technology "''reconfigures publicness, blurs 'audiences' and publics, and alters what it means to engage in public life.''" The authors ask, What is the ...") |
Lombanaphd (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | Digital and networked technology "''reconfigures publicness, blurs 'audiences' and publics, and alters what it means to engage in public life.''" The authors ask, What is the nature of public life online? According to boyd and Baym publicnness is shaped by both the architecture and affordances of digital networked media, and by people's social contexts, identities, and practices. People's socially-mediated publicness is an complex and changing process of media practices that blur private/public boundaries, interaction with multi-layered audiences, and performing persoanl identities. Hence, public life changes in networked society and culture, and people is developing new | + | Digital and networked technology "''reconfigures publicness, blurs 'audiences' and publics, and alters what it means to engage in public life.''" The authors ask, What is the nature of public life online? According to boyd and Baym publicnness is shaped by both the architecture and affordances of digital networked media, and by people's social contexts, identities, and practices. People's socially-mediated publicness is an complex and changing process of media practices that blur private/public boundaries, interaction with multi-layered audiences, and performing persoanl identities. Hence, public life changes in networked society and culture, and people is developing new literacies and strategies for navigating socially mediated publicness. |
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | "social media complicate what it means to be public, to address audiences, and to build publics and counterpublics." (320) | ||
| + | |||
| + | "To the extent they could, people have always used media to create public identities for themselves, others, and groups." (321) | ||
| + | |||
| + | "It is thus not the ability to use technology toward these objectives that is new with social media, but the scale at which people who never had access to broad- cast media are now doing so on an everyday basis and the conscious strategic appropriation of media tools in this process." 321 | ||
| + | |||
| + | "That level of moderate, widespread publicness is unprecedented. There are more layers of publicness available to those using networked media than ever before; as a result, people’s relationship to public life is shifting in ways we have barely begun to understand." 321 | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | What’s posted online is not necessarily visible to everyone but can spread easily. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Examples of these kind of changes: | ||
| + | * home videos and youtube | ||
| + | * photograps and flicker and isntagrama | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | People can "use the public and quasi-public qualities of social media to carve out" identities, spaces, circulate content, and coordinate actions. They struggle with both the visibility and obscurity of their mediated acts in networked mediated spaces. | ||
| + | |||
| + | "As people use these media to accomplish more than they can do without them, they juggle multiple layers and kinds of audiences, bringing into being multiple and diverse kinds of publics, counterpublics, and other emergent social arrangements." (321-322) | ||
| + | |||
| + | "Social-mediated publicness calls into question understandings of the relation between public and private and between audiences and publics." (322) | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | public and private—openness and closedness—are dialectic tensions inextricable from and constitutive of one another (Baxter & Montgomery, 2007). | ||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | |||
| + | "When private is made public through social-mediation, the nature of both experi- ence and of privacy itself can be changed. Yet, the realities of visibility and obscurity introduce new complications. There is little doubt that social media heighten the potential for visibility and introduce the possibility of public engagement that far exceeds what’s possible in an unmediated environment. Yet, it is also true that most content online is obscure and consumed by few. As a result, social media introduce '''a conundrum of visibility''' (boyd & Marwick, 2009), as '''''people’s mediated acts are both visible and invisible in networked publics'''''." | ||
Revision as of 09:56, 12 April 2013
Digital and networked technology "reconfigures publicness, blurs 'audiences' and publics, and alters what it means to engage in public life." The authors ask, What is the nature of public life online? According to boyd and Baym publicnness is shaped by both the architecture and affordances of digital networked media, and by people's social contexts, identities, and practices. People's socially-mediated publicness is an complex and changing process of media practices that blur private/public boundaries, interaction with multi-layered audiences, and performing persoanl identities. Hence, public life changes in networked society and culture, and people is developing new literacies and strategies for navigating socially mediated publicness.
"social media complicate what it means to be public, to address audiences, and to build publics and counterpublics." (320)
"To the extent they could, people have always used media to create public identities for themselves, others, and groups." (321)
"It is thus not the ability to use technology toward these objectives that is new with social media, but the scale at which people who never had access to broad- cast media are now doing so on an everyday basis and the conscious strategic appropriation of media tools in this process." 321
"That level of moderate, widespread publicness is unprecedented. There are more layers of publicness available to those using networked media than ever before; as a result, people’s relationship to public life is shifting in ways we have barely begun to understand." 321
What’s posted online is not necessarily visible to everyone but can spread easily.
Examples of these kind of changes:
- home videos and youtube
- photograps and flicker and isntagrama
People can "use the public and quasi-public qualities of social media to carve out" identities, spaces, circulate content, and coordinate actions. They struggle with both the visibility and obscurity of their mediated acts in networked mediated spaces.
"As people use these media to accomplish more than they can do without them, they juggle multiple layers and kinds of audiences, bringing into being multiple and diverse kinds of publics, counterpublics, and other emergent social arrangements." (321-322)
"Social-mediated publicness calls into question understandings of the relation between public and private and between audiences and publics." (322)
public and private—openness and closedness—are dialectic tensions inextricable from and constitutive of one another (Baxter & Montgomery, 2007).
"When private is made public through social-mediation, the nature of both experi- ence and of privacy itself can be changed. Yet, the realities of visibility and obscurity introduce new complications. There is little doubt that social media heighten the potential for visibility and introduce the possibility of public engagement that far exceeds what’s possible in an unmediated environment. Yet, it is also true that most content online is obscure and consumed by few. As a result, social media introduce a conundrum of visibility (boyd & Marwick, 2009), as people’s mediated acts are both visible and invisible in networked publics."
