Without today's technology's, as a society we would struggle to survive and evolve, we are dependent. Stelarc notes the "idea of human evolution aided and determined by technology", such as within the last 100 years through technological advancements we have evolved more than the previous 1000 years (Shaw, 2008, pg.81). Although there is also an argument that "we may have 'made' these machines but now, in a very real sense, they make us" (Shaw, 2008, pg.88). Technologies which have allowed us to understand the human genome have changed our understanding of what it is to be human. Such as how we can sum up our attributes, our humanity into "Different combinations of 'code'", just as we understand computers through binary code (Shaw, 2008, pg.89).
Societal structures have also formed around the functionality of technology's , such as how Foucault identifies how "the solider is 'manipulated, shaped, trained' so that it 'obeys'", referring to how the functions of technology can be implanted into human behavior (Shaw, 2008, pg.82). This concept can be applied to how we are socialised into society, such as school children trained to move from class to class at the sound of a bell, to store required information, to obey, to become part of the "specialized machine"(Shaw, 2008, pg.82). We try and conform to the ideal, what society expects of us while also judging others who don't fit the mould, in order to "reconfirm what is 'I' by bringing close to us and then rejecting all that has been deemed 'Not-I'" (Shaw, 2008, pg.100).
Marxists argue further that "the worker's body is a commodity", labour to be bought and sold, body's that show "the marks of social status and social class"(Shaw, 2008, pg.83). That our physical appearance, class, gender and status can separate us from the "norm that is invisible and assumed", the perfect image projected by society (Shaw, 2008, pg.85). Our consumer culture permits us to consume products such as fake tan, make-up and fitness products to come closer to this ideal norm. A temporary means of achieving this goal is is that of the "bodiless exultation of cyberspace", leaving our flesh behind for a world where we can become unmarked (Shaw, 2008, pg.86). Explaining the popularity of social networks and online community's such as Pinterest, where we can create new identity's and be validated for technical skills which aren't as valued in real life.
Shaw, D, (2008) Technoculture: The key Concepts (Oxford: Berg Press)
Showing posts with label active consumer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label active consumer. Show all posts
Wednesday, 30 October 2013
Wednesday, 23 October 2013
The cultural changes of New Media
The ideas of New Media were not simply created by new technologies alone but though cultural changes in society, changes such as Modernism. As Creeber notes, "Modernism is the umbrella term we give to the way that human society responded to the changes that took place during the industrial revolution", (Creeber, 2009, pg.11). A world transformed by ideas of a beneficial and progressive industrial society, diminishing previous societal structures such as a religious monopoly of dominance.
The faith of the masses now invested in technological advancement and material goods to help deal with the stresses of daily life rather than relying on spiritual guidance, "A triumph of consumerism, commercial culture"(Manovich, 2002, pg.31). The Fordism production line ethic resonated this change across all layers of society, the same product replicated cheaply, quickly and with little collective thought, as the "Modernists came to perceive industrialization as the enemy of free thought and individuality", (Creeber, 2009, pg.12). Manovich notes this practice in today's media production, where "modern media follows the factory logic", dividing a singular project into repetitive jobs such as an artist who only colours backgrounds for an animation, (Manovich, 2002, pg.51).
In Post-Modern society, focus changed from the consumption of material goods to that of information. Leading to the rise of "information technologies, the globalization of financial markets, the growth of the service and the white-collar", an information age, (Creeber, 2009, pg.15). The Frankfurt school feared the "ideological influence of the media on a gullible and powerless audience", the masses drooling over their mass produced, mind numbing, popular culture? (Creeber, 2009, pg.15). The elites who dismissed popular culture as a low brow mind control underestimated the complex relationship between the reader and the text. Audiences are not mere puppets of media but "active participants in the production of meaning", they can interpret the meaning of texts using their own cultural means (Creeber, 2009, pg.16).
Identifying how elements such as popular culture cannot be categorised as high or low brow, "as the 'real' and 'unreal', the 'authentic' and 'inauthentic'", as the meaning lies within the cultural view of the reader (Creeber, 2009, pg.17). This is identified in today's culture where the meaning and status of media is being blurred, using multimedia mediums such as YouTube. Where low brow mash-ups such as the "What does the wolf say?" become more significant than professional industry standard media. The masses now hold more power and influence over the media they consume, sharing, choosing, participating and driving New Media.
Bibliography
Creeber, G. Digital Theory: Theorizing New Media (Maidstone: OUP)
The faith of the masses now invested in technological advancement and material goods to help deal with the stresses of daily life rather than relying on spiritual guidance, "A triumph of consumerism, commercial culture"(Manovich, 2002, pg.31). The Fordism production line ethic resonated this change across all layers of society, the same product replicated cheaply, quickly and with little collective thought, as the "Modernists came to perceive industrialization as the enemy of free thought and individuality", (Creeber, 2009, pg.12). Manovich notes this practice in today's media production, where "modern media follows the factory logic", dividing a singular project into repetitive jobs such as an artist who only colours backgrounds for an animation, (Manovich, 2002, pg.51).
In Post-Modern society, focus changed from the consumption of material goods to that of information. Leading to the rise of "information technologies, the globalization of financial markets, the growth of the service and the white-collar", an information age, (Creeber, 2009, pg.15). The Frankfurt school feared the "ideological influence of the media on a gullible and powerless audience", the masses drooling over their mass produced, mind numbing, popular culture? (Creeber, 2009, pg.15). The elites who dismissed popular culture as a low brow mind control underestimated the complex relationship between the reader and the text. Audiences are not mere puppets of media but "active participants in the production of meaning", they can interpret the meaning of texts using their own cultural means (Creeber, 2009, pg.16).
Identifying how elements such as popular culture cannot be categorised as high or low brow, "as the 'real' and 'unreal', the 'authentic' and 'inauthentic'", as the meaning lies within the cultural view of the reader (Creeber, 2009, pg.17). This is identified in today's culture where the meaning and status of media is being blurred, using multimedia mediums such as YouTube. Where low brow mash-ups such as the "What does the wolf say?" become more significant than professional industry standard media. The masses now hold more power and influence over the media they consume, sharing, choosing, participating and driving New Media.
Bibliography
Creeber, G. Digital Theory: Theorizing New Media (Maidstone: OUP)
Changes in New Media
"Modernism is the umbrella term we give to the way that human society responded to the changes that took place during the industrial revolution." (Creeber, 2009, pg11) New media wasn't simply discovered when the industrial revolution came along but through culture and how it has changed and this was mainly influenced by the coming of modernism.
'The Frankfurt School' has the idea about how the media is like mass production and that media is very like fordism as ford where well known for their mass production and how every car was nearly built the same. "T. Fords were exactly the same. When asked what colours his cars came in, Ford famously replied, ‘any color – as long as it’s black’." (Creeber, 2009, pg13).
"A post-industrial (sometimes known as a post-Fordist) economy is one in which an economic transition has taken place from a manufacturing-based economy to a service-based economy."(Creeber, 2009, pg15). The media went from a mass produced industry also known as the heavy worker society where people didn't have little office jobs but in fact sat behind a desk, also known as the white collar worker. This was due to the growth in the financial industry and that people where becoming more and more involved into 'new media' and this was taken the attention away from the mass production and now "consumption and leisure now determine our experiences rather than work and production. This means that ‘consumer culture’ comes to dominate the cultural sphere"(Creeber, 2009, pg15).
This is a totally different look at what new media is and is saying that it has evolved from the mass production too the 'service based economy'. This means that people used to watch boring standardised rubbish that everyone will maybe like or be able to relate too but instead the media has to be changed as culture has changed so that it fits in with 'consumer culture'. Meaning that media is now tailored to what you like instead of a standard programme for everyone this is due to the mass about of channels that are now available in this modern time.
Bibliography
Creeber, G. Digital Theory: Theorizing New Media (Maidstone: OUP)
Monday, 21 October 2013
Digital Media On The Production Line
Modernism, as Creeber puts it, 'is the umbrella term we give to the way that human society responded to he changes that took place during the industrial revolution' (2009: p.11). This came about around the mid 20th century, as the world was repairing itself from one war, and preparing to go to another. Industrialisation was perceived by many modernists 'as the enemy of free thought and individuality' (Creeber, 2009: p.12)
Industrialisation really only benefited the producers of products, beginning with Henry Ford's T. Fords. This was a way to cut costs, through production and staff, but also a way that companies could produce the same product on a large scale in half the time. The birth of the production line, as apposed to single product work, revolutionised the secondary sector. However, Theodor Adorno, a member of the Germany-fleeing intellectuals from the Frankfurt School describes the way that the music industry is just simply producing the same music over and over again, and selling it to make money.
Post-Modernism comes along slightly after the industrial revolution. Post-industial (or Post-Fodist) was an 'economic transition [...] from a manufacturing based economy to a service-based economy' which saw the 'decline of heavy industry' (Creeber 2009: p.15) Audience interactivity with this new post-modern idea was first thrown about as ideas by Marshall McLuhan, this is highlighted in Paul Levinson's Digital McLuhan (1999) where McLuhan sees the audience as transforming from 'Voyeurs to participants' (Levinson, 1999: p.65-79)
McLuhan really was stumbling across something which years later, is pretty accurate. Television audiences, don't just watch what is happening on the screen, but can also play along, influence and find about more about what they are watching. From the introduction of voting on (originally) Channel 4's 'Big Brother' and ITV's 'X Factor', to the mobile game which rang along side Channel 4's 'Million Pound Drop', to programs such as BBC's 'Children In Need' showing live tweets on-screen.
Bibliography
Creeber, G. (2009). DIGITAL THEORY: Theorizing New Media & Cubitt, D. (2009) Case Study: Digital Aesthetics in ED. Creeber, G. & Royston, M. (2009) Digital Cultures: Understanding New Media; Maidstone, Open University Press.
Levinson, P. (1999) Digital McLuhan: A Guide to the Information Millenium. Routledge, London.
Industrialisation really only benefited the producers of products, beginning with Henry Ford's T. Fords. This was a way to cut costs, through production and staff, but also a way that companies could produce the same product on a large scale in half the time. The birth of the production line, as apposed to single product work, revolutionised the secondary sector. However, Theodor Adorno, a member of the Germany-fleeing intellectuals from the Frankfurt School describes the way that the music industry is just simply producing the same music over and over again, and selling it to make money.
Post-Modernism comes along slightly after the industrial revolution. Post-industial (or Post-Fodist) was an 'economic transition [...] from a manufacturing based economy to a service-based economy' which saw the 'decline of heavy industry' (Creeber 2009: p.15) Audience interactivity with this new post-modern idea was first thrown about as ideas by Marshall McLuhan, this is highlighted in Paul Levinson's Digital McLuhan (1999) where McLuhan sees the audience as transforming from 'Voyeurs to participants' (Levinson, 1999: p.65-79)
McLuhan really was stumbling across something which years later, is pretty accurate. Television audiences, don't just watch what is happening on the screen, but can also play along, influence and find about more about what they are watching. From the introduction of voting on (originally) Channel 4's 'Big Brother' and ITV's 'X Factor', to the mobile game which rang along side Channel 4's 'Million Pound Drop', to programs such as BBC's 'Children In Need' showing live tweets on-screen.
Bibliography
Creeber, G. (2009). DIGITAL THEORY: Theorizing New Media & Cubitt, D. (2009) Case Study: Digital Aesthetics in ED. Creeber, G. & Royston, M. (2009) Digital Cultures: Understanding New Media; Maidstone, Open University Press.
Levinson, P. (1999) Digital McLuhan: A Guide to the Information Millenium. Routledge, London.
Wednesday, 9 October 2013
Convergence, Media Ownership and Consumer Participation
Convergence is an increasingly common term in debates about New Media. However, convergence does not imply a replacement of old media by new media, contrary to what many people believe. Rather, it is a collaboration and a combination of platforms, new forms of content and the active role of the consumer.
“Convergence involves both a change in the way media is produced and a change in the way media is consumed” (Jenkins, 2008, p16). It is a process that is driven by both corporate companies and consumers. On the one hand, media companies are learning to control the flow of content in order to reach the largest audience and to increase their profit. On the other hand, consumers are also exercising increasing control over content and interaction with other consumers. However, the main question to be asked is whether the phenomenon of convergence is beneficial for society or not.
Therefore, the consequences of media ownership are of particular concern, especially since only a limited number of big media companies seem to dominate the whole media and entertainment industry. An example of such a company is Warner Bros., which has shifted attention away from a singular focus on films to a focus on the entertainment industry in general, producing popular music, computer games, web sites, toys and books (Jenkins, 2008, p16). As a result, this can contribute to a decline in the variety of offers. Then again, big media corporations can also positively contribute to more competence of the producers and the quality of products.
Moreover, the term convergence also implies a cultural shift, as consumers are playing an increasingly active role in the creation of content. To describe this shift, Henry Jenkins uses the term participatory culture (Jenkins, 2008, p3). However, Jenkins also acknowledges that in this participatory culture, not all individuals are equal in their ability to participate. He states that “corporations (…) still exert greater power than any individual consumer or even the aggregate of consumers. And some consumers have greater abilities to participate in this emerging culture than others.” (Jenkins, 2008, p3). The main problem remains both an unequal access to new technologies, as well as the lack of skills, which results in exclusion of certain groups of people in this so-called participatory culture.
Bibliography
Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised., NYU Press.
“Convergence involves both a change in the way media is produced and a change in the way media is consumed” (Jenkins, 2008, p16). It is a process that is driven by both corporate companies and consumers. On the one hand, media companies are learning to control the flow of content in order to reach the largest audience and to increase their profit. On the other hand, consumers are also exercising increasing control over content and interaction with other consumers. However, the main question to be asked is whether the phenomenon of convergence is beneficial for society or not.
Therefore, the consequences of media ownership are of particular concern, especially since only a limited number of big media companies seem to dominate the whole media and entertainment industry. An example of such a company is Warner Bros., which has shifted attention away from a singular focus on films to a focus on the entertainment industry in general, producing popular music, computer games, web sites, toys and books (Jenkins, 2008, p16). As a result, this can contribute to a decline in the variety of offers. Then again, big media corporations can also positively contribute to more competence of the producers and the quality of products.
Moreover, the term convergence also implies a cultural shift, as consumers are playing an increasingly active role in the creation of content. To describe this shift, Henry Jenkins uses the term participatory culture (Jenkins, 2008, p3). However, Jenkins also acknowledges that in this participatory culture, not all individuals are equal in their ability to participate. He states that “corporations (…) still exert greater power than any individual consumer or even the aggregate of consumers. And some consumers have greater abilities to participate in this emerging culture than others.” (Jenkins, 2008, p3). The main problem remains both an unequal access to new technologies, as well as the lack of skills, which results in exclusion of certain groups of people in this so-called participatory culture.
Bibliography
Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised., NYU Press.
Convergence culture, An Introduction.
Convergence culture is not simply "the flow of content across multiple media platforms", it cannot be summed up in the action of using a mobile to watch TV (Jenkins, 2008, p2). It is a new media network of shared ideas and knowledge, "a cultural shift as consumers are encouraged to seek out new information and make connections among dispersed media content" (Jenkins, 2008, p3). No longer is the individual a powerless, passive consumer, but instead multitasking, sharing, exploring and interacting with other participants though multiple media, creating the media experience they desire. Without "participatory culture", creating a "buzz", media industry's would lose their power and influence over the masses, decreasing their media contents value (Jenkins,2008, p3). Identifying the significance of social networking where new media community's come together to create a "collective intelligence" (Jenkins, 2008, p4). Although empowering the participant, giving them mediums to share and create. The media industry's still build and control the mediums, using participants for the industry's own gain, such as how Facebook users generate most of the content.
Consumers are significant in "driving the process" of convergence, they are the active core mechanism which determines how to use and connect media platforms for their own media experience (Jenkins, 2008, p8). Identifying how singular platforms no longer maintain interest, no one wants a mobile that's just a mobile; they want a more connective experience. Where each mediums quality's and functions can connect and compensate for another's, such as using "games to explore ideas that couldn't fit within two-hour films"(Jenkins, 2008,p9), creating a richer media experience. This experience is delivered through "delivery systems" which are "only technologies", they become obsolete in our fast past consumer society (Jenkins, 2008, p14). What stays constant is the "media", the "cultural systems", rooted in our culture, our media desires, constantly evolving to meet society's needs (Jenkins, 2008, p14). Convergence resolves our need for on the go access to multiple media quickly and efficiently and will only grow more complex with time.
Although convergence is by no means harmonious, instead a "perpetual tangle" of different "specialized" mediums trying to intertwine and dominate one another (Jenkins, 2008, p15). With different functions, software's and intended uses "There is no single black box", but instead a mass of devices filling our homes (Jenkins, 2008, p16).
Bibliography
Jenkins, H. (2008) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, 2nd revised edition, NYU Press
Consumers are significant in "driving the process" of convergence, they are the active core mechanism which determines how to use and connect media platforms for their own media experience (Jenkins, 2008, p8). Identifying how singular platforms no longer maintain interest, no one wants a mobile that's just a mobile; they want a more connective experience. Where each mediums quality's and functions can connect and compensate for another's, such as using "games to explore ideas that couldn't fit within two-hour films"(Jenkins, 2008,p9), creating a richer media experience. This experience is delivered through "delivery systems" which are "only technologies", they become obsolete in our fast past consumer society (Jenkins, 2008, p14). What stays constant is the "media", the "cultural systems", rooted in our culture, our media desires, constantly evolving to meet society's needs (Jenkins, 2008, p14). Convergence resolves our need for on the go access to multiple media quickly and efficiently and will only grow more complex with time.
Although convergence is by no means harmonious, instead a "perpetual tangle" of different "specialized" mediums trying to intertwine and dominate one another (Jenkins, 2008, p15). With different functions, software's and intended uses "There is no single black box", but instead a mass of devices filling our homes (Jenkins, 2008, p16).
Bibliography
Jenkins, H. (2008) Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, 2nd revised edition, NYU Press
Video Did Not Kill The Radio Star
"By convergence, I mean the flow of content across multiple media platforms" (Jenkins, 2008, p2)
Henry Jenkins is introducing to us the convergence, or mixing, of mediums to create new ways for the media audience to interact with different platforms. Although this seems strange to consider a generation of technology where multiple mediums aren't adapted by technology, we have to consider Jenkins' time of writing. In 2008, the first iPhone was only just released. Steve Jobs presented the iPhone as a "revolutionary mobile phone". He talks about three new products, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, a revolutionary mobile phone and a breakthrough internet communications device. However, he soon reveals that these are all in the one product.
Henry Jenkins is introducing to us the convergence, or mixing, of mediums to create new ways for the media audience to interact with different platforms. Although this seems strange to consider a generation of technology where multiple mediums aren't adapted by technology, we have to consider Jenkins' time of writing. In 2008, the first iPhone was only just released. Steve Jobs presented the iPhone as a "revolutionary mobile phone". He talks about three new products, a widescreen iPod with touch controls, a revolutionary mobile phone and a breakthrough internet communications device. However, he soon reveals that these are all in the one product.
(BorisLeeHK, 2012)
The breakthrough of the iPhone is exactly what Jenkins is talking about when he talks about convergence. Jenkins says "Each old medium was forced to coexist with the emerging media (..) printed words did not kill spoken words. Cinema did not kill theatre. Television did not kill radio." (Jenkins, 2008, p14)
Jenkins talks about his living room, "I am seeing more and more black boxes" (Jenkins, 2008 p15) How long is it before we have one device which literally does everything? Considering the technological advances of the past 5 years, we aren't to far away. Mobile phones are a cinema, doctors, supermarket, photo albums, (practically) DSLRs, banks, take aways, bibles, loyalty cards, compasses, book stores and anything we want them to be. What else needs to be converged with our pocket device to make life easier?
The "Black Box Fallacy" (Jenkins, 2008, p13) is when he talks about the technologies which are used to deliver the media, change and update, so for example, the iPhone, 3G, 3GS, 4, 4s, 5, 5s, 5c. These were all updated with new technologies, for example, voice recognition, mobile internet, finger print recognition, etc. "Media, on the other hand, evolve" (Jenkins 2008, p13)
Jenkins doesn't give much away about his opinion on how convergence is affecting our culture in the introduction but he talks technologies which we are using and seeing being developed today. I think that the Cheskin Research which he mentions would have a different view on todays technology, eleven years after their initial research.
"The old idea of convergence was that all devices would converge into one central device that did everything for you (a la universal remote). What we are now seeing is the hardware diverging while the content converges."( Cheskin Research, 2002, p8,9)
Bibliography
Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised., NYU Press.
Cheskin., 2002. Designing Digital Experiences For Youth
BorisLeeHK. (2012) Steve Jobs - 2007 iPhone Presentation (Part 1 of 2). [Online Video]. 22 April. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etyt4osHgX0. [Accessed: 8 October 2013].
BorisLeeHK. (2012) Steve Jobs - 2007 iPhone Presentation (Part 1 of 2). [Online Video]. 22 April. Available from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Etyt4osHgX0. [Accessed: 8 October 2013].
Tuesday, 8 October 2013
Convergence and participatory culture
"Welcome to convergence culture (...), where the power of the media producer and the power of the media consumer interact in unpredictable ways." (Jenkins, 2008, p2). Convergence is described as a process where different industries work together and the boundaries between different media fade. In this introduction Jenkins highlights the active participation of media consumers as a key feature of this process. It seems as if convergence culture would not exist if the consumer hadn't changed. However it remains unclear whether today's "active" consumer is actually different from yesterday's traditional media users.
The term "participatory culture" brings the image to mind of an engaged community where everybody's voice is heard, like Plato's utopian democracy. But just as there was no role for women and slaves in Plato's state, not everybody's voice is heard in this participatory culture either. Jenkins (2008, p3) acknowledges this by saying that "(n)ot all participants are created equal", but with this he mainly seems to aim at corporate media. However, it could be argued that the "active" audience is merely a small elite group. Research shows that the digital divide still exists both within (Van Deursen and Van Dijk, 2013) and between countries (Bacao et al., 2012). This means that there are large differences in access and ability to use technology.
Even if you look at the consumers who use New Media (almost) every day, the question remains whether they are really as active as Jenkins seems to suggest. When looking at Youtube for instance -for Jenkins says this evolution is still mainly restricted to recreational life - it becomes clear that most visitors don't actually upload videos or even comment on them and that the active produsers are just a small group. It looks like many users still use New Media in similar ways as the passive, old media.
Jenkins -like Time magazine in electing "you" person of the year- seems to be too convinced of a widespread participatory culture. Technology may have already changed a great deal in the process of convergence, but the evolution of the user still seems to be at an early stage.
Bibliography
Bacao, F., Cruz-Jesus, F. and Oliveira, T. (2012) Digital divide across the European Union, Information and Management, 49 (6), pp.288-289.
Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised., NYU Press.
Van Deurzen, A. J. and Van Dijk, J. A. (2013) The digital divide shifts to differences in usage, New Media and Society, 0 (0), pp. 14-16.
The term "participatory culture" brings the image to mind of an engaged community where everybody's voice is heard, like Plato's utopian democracy. But just as there was no role for women and slaves in Plato's state, not everybody's voice is heard in this participatory culture either. Jenkins (2008, p3) acknowledges this by saying that "(n)ot all participants are created equal", but with this he mainly seems to aim at corporate media. However, it could be argued that the "active" audience is merely a small elite group. Research shows that the digital divide still exists both within (Van Deursen and Van Dijk, 2013) and between countries (Bacao et al., 2012). This means that there are large differences in access and ability to use technology.
Even if you look at the consumers who use New Media (almost) every day, the question remains whether they are really as active as Jenkins seems to suggest. When looking at Youtube for instance -for Jenkins says this evolution is still mainly restricted to recreational life - it becomes clear that most visitors don't actually upload videos or even comment on them and that the active produsers are just a small group. It looks like many users still use New Media in similar ways as the passive, old media.
Jenkins -like Time magazine in electing "you" person of the year- seems to be too convinced of a widespread participatory culture. Technology may have already changed a great deal in the process of convergence, but the evolution of the user still seems to be at an early stage.
Bibliography
Bacao, F., Cruz-Jesus, F. and Oliveira, T. (2012) Digital divide across the European Union, Information and Management, 49 (6), pp.288-289.
Jenkins, H., 2008. Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide Revised., NYU Press.
Van Deurzen, A. J. and Van Dijk, J. A. (2013) The digital divide shifts to differences in usage, New Media and Society, 0 (0), pp. 14-16.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)