modern identities and social relations

modern identities and social relations have been substantially shaped by developments in media. Have identities become more ‘reflexive’ than in the past? Are identities more individualistic? Are identities affected by advertising and other forms of promotion? Have social relations been ‘disembedded’ (in Giddens’ terms)?

Since pre-industrial revolution, form of communication has changed in many ways from face-to-face communication to mediated communication. The development of media shaped human being lives in term of their individual lifestyle and social relations.
According to John B. Thomson (1995) in The Media and Modernity[5] , the development in media lead to the reordering of space and time or the way in which individual have sense of
Despatialized simultaneity: simultaneity does not necessarily presupposed locality.
? how individuals experience spatial and temporal aspects of life, > Meyorwitz: no sense of place.
? How individuals experience the past and and the world beyond their immediate milieu. Mediated historicity and worldliness.
People’s sense of belonging. Mediated sociality.
Disembedding refers to the way in which contemporary social practices can no longer be primarily defined by their grounding, or embeddedness, in the local context of a restricted place and time. Social practices are now, in large part, removed from the immediacies of context, with the relations they involve typically being stretched over large tracts of time and space. Local experiences and events are shaped by processes taking place on the other side of the world, and vice versa. These are processes, moreover, that are primarily impersonal and abstract.
the characteristic of mediated communication divided into five categories ; the technical and institutional, commodification of symbolic forms, mass communication institutes a structured break between the production of symbolic forms and their reception, the availability of symbolic forms in space and time, availability and access of media forms to a plurality of media recipients and the blurring of the private and public domains.
the key idea I will explore the development of media and its relation to the transformation of space and time in individual life and s/he social relations.

The development of mass media bonded to change in individual life style and s/he social interaction in several way. To begin with the individual part, in the past, people generally communicated through face-to-face to the mediated world in nowadays that people tend to communicated through media which refer to

In the past individual identity was bonded by their family and also local community where they grew-up and participated as a part of community. Their knowledge of world view are told and transferred from old generation to new generation by oral tradition. It limited the flow of information to the horizon form only the specific topic in specific community, for example,
7. Self and experience in a mediated world
Modernity
Reflexive and open-ended self-formation. Non-local knowledge. The capacity of experience disconnected from the activity of encountering. How related mediated experiences to the practical contexts of our day-to-day lives?
The self as a symbolic project
Thompson claims to represent an account of the self fundamentally different from that of structural linguistics etc, such as Althusser and Foucault’s: techniques of the self: “the ways in which individuals are turned into subjects whi think and act in accordance with the possibilities that are laid out in advance”. However, is Thompson’s perspective very different from that of Foucault?
A hermeneutics-inspired perspective
The self as a symbolic project that the individual actively constructs. A narrative of self-identity. Unofficial biographers of ourself (the link to Foucault here seems evident?).
Communication media
> The importance of the development of communication media: the process of self-formation dependent on acvcess to mediated forms of communication.
Enriches and accenturates the reflexive organization of the self. Coherent and continuosly revised biographical narrative.
Negative consequences
1. The mediated intrusion of ideological messages into the practical contexts of everyday life. Thompson’s accont of ideology; the ways in which symbolic forms serve to establish and sustain relations of domination. The role of the media in such ideological processes. How these messages are incorporated into the lives of the recipients.
2. The double-bind of mediated dependency: “It renders this reflexive organization increasingly dependent on systems over which the individual has relatively little control. Part of the whole modern societies thing. See also Ulrich Beck: individualization and institutionalization.
3. The disorienting effect of symbolic overload: the confrontation of countless narratives of self-formation and visions of world. Necessitates a selective approach. The importance of significant others (Katz & Lazarsfel, Radway). The interplay of complexity and expertise.
The absorption of self in mediated quasi-interaction: individuals relying too heavily on mediated symbolic materials.

More information
The reordering of space and time
Despatialized simultaneity: simultaneity does not necessarily presupposed locality.
how individuals experience spatial and temporal aspects of life, > Meyorwitz: no sense of place.

How individuals experience the past and and the world beyond their immediate milieu. Mediated historicity and worldliness.
People’s sense of belonging. Mediated sociality.
One of the key themes of his work is the role of the media in the transformation of space and time in social life, and the creation of new forms of action and interaction beyond temporal and spatial frameworks. Influenced strongly by hermeneutics, he studies communication and its uses, and links it closely with social context. Other key concepts are the transformation of visibility, the media and tradition, and identity and the symbolic project.
His book Ideology and Mass Culture is a study of what the theory of ideology entails in modern society. William Outhwaite of the University of Sussex dubs it “a pathbreaking work which will undoubtedly become one of the fundamental texts in the theory of ideology.”[2] Thompson’s essay “The New Visibility” is employed as the basis for the study of media at Rhodes University, while his tome Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age has been described by Amy Binder of Clemson University as “excellent”.[3] His work stands out for its recognition of the importance of the nature and development of mass communication.
Thompson then proceeds to talk about the use of the word ‘communication’ and how mass communication is often “overwhelmingly one-way.”(Thompson, 1995, p14) He contrasts this with face to face communication and the two-way process that takes place when people talk to each other. Thompson is of the belief that in the age of digital technology there are more suitable terms that can be used including “‘mediated communication’ or more simply, ‘the media’ which are less laden with misleading assumptions.”(Thompson, 1995, p15)
Thompson, in The Media and Modernity[5] offers five key characteristics to explain the term mass communication. Thompson’s first characteristic is the technical and institutional means of production and diffusion, meaning that the “development of mass communication is inseparable from the development of the media industries”.[6] Secondly Thompson highlights what he labels commodification of symbolic forms which can be subjected into two forms of valorization; information having economic value and information having symbolic value. Thompson’s third characteristic is that mass communication institutes a structured break between the production of symbolic forms and their reception, meaning that the content is not produced at the same place and time as when the audience receives it. Thompson further goes on to highlight some implications with this characteristic, suggesting that due to this structured break media producers are deprived of the viewers reactions which alters the feedback they are given. Furthermore media producers are unable to obtain the audiences interpretation of their message thus making the audience and the producers unequal partners in the process of symbolic exchange. The fourth characteristic highlighted by Thompson is that mass communication extends the availability of symbolic forms in space and time, this examines the different contexts in which the message is produced and received. Which leads into Thompson’s fifth characteristic of mass communication, which involves the public circulation of symbolic forms, this characteristic examines the availability and access of media forms to a plurality of media recipients and the blurring of the private and public domains.

John Thompson: The media and modernity. A social theory of the media

1. Communication and social context
Communication media Social + technical dimensions.
Always a contextualised social phenomenon: embedded in social contexts, with structuring impact on communication
Austin: speech act theory Communication as a form of action. But Austin does not contextualise communication and speech acts.
Here: Social phenomena as purposive actions carried out in structured social contexts. Within ‘fields of interaction’ (> Bourdieu).
> Power
Uses of communication media Communication: a distinctive kind of social activity: production, transmission and reception of symbolic forms. Involves the implementation of technical media; the material substratum of symbolic forms.
General aspect and attributes of communication media 1. Degree of fixation of the symbolic form > storing capacity
2. > Allows for reproduction
3. Space-time distanciation
4. Encoding and decoding skills
Characteristics of ‘mass communication’ First on the problematic aspects with the term mass communication/mass media. However to refer to “the institutionalized production and generalized diffusion of symbolic goods via the fixation and transmission of information or symbolic content”. Not unique to mass communication, but set of features typical and important.
1. Technical and institutional means of production and diffusion
2. Commodification of symbolic forms
3. Structured break between production and reception of symbolic forms
4. Extends the availability of symbolic forms in space and time
5. The public circulation of symbolic forms. Products available to a plurality of recipients.
The reordering of space and time Despatialized simultaneity: simultaneity does not necessarily presupposed locality.
? how individuals experience spatial and temporal aspects of life, > Meyorwitz: no sense of place.
? How individuals experience the past and and the world beyond their immediate milieu. Mediated historicity and worldliness.
? People’s sense of belonging. Mediated sociality.
Communication, appropriation and everyday life 1. Structuralism, semiotics and co.
2. Earlier empirical traditions of media research
3. Later various approaches using a variety of methods.
Reception as routine Routine and practical activity. Situated activity: located in specific social-historical contexts. Integral part of everyday life.
Skilled accomplishment Extremely diverse, but generally based on learning. May be socially differentiated.
Hermeneutic process Process of interpretations. Gadamer: not a presuppositionless activity, but an active, creative process.
> Meaning According to individual interpretations. Complex, shifting phenomenon.
Also part of reflection, and self-reflection. Self-formation and self-understanding. Constructing a sense of self.

3. The rise of mediated interaction
Development of communication media affecting patterns of social interaction. Not simply new networks of relationships transmissions, but creates new forms of action and interaction. Separated from physical locale.

There are three categories of communication which are Face-to-face; mediated; mediated quasi-interaction for example Consequences for type of interaction. Saturated with multiplicity of symbolic cues. For mediated communication, for instant Letter writing and telephone conversations. And obviously a lot more today than Thompson mentions. Involves the use of a technical medium, narrowing of symbolic cues. Individuals more dependent on their own interpretations and contexts. For, Social relations established by mass media. Produced for an indefinite range of potential recipients. Monological interaction. Thompson emphesises that these situations blur, but it must be said that these crude typification is even more problematic than before, that is, mostly relations between mediated and mediated quasi-interaction > paper on conceptualising personal media. Thompson, however, does take precautions, such as further development of new communication technologies. My point is still valid, Thompson’s typification might be too crude.

In this term Not necessarily at the expense of face-to-face interaction. But modern social life increasingly made up of forms of interaction, which are not f2f. “The interactoin mix of social life has changed” (: 87). It is also Contributes in the complexity and unpredictability of the modern world. Or onological social securities.
Three types of interaction
Face-to-face Context of co-presence.
Mediated interaction
Mediated quasi-interaction
Rise of mediated interaction
The social organization of mediated quasi-interaction References to Erving Goffman’s presentation of self: front and back regions. Individuals constantly adapting behaviour to shifting boundaries.
Communication media Profound impact on nature of front and back regions and relations between them.
Technically mediated quasi-interaction Symbolic forms produced in one context, and received in multiplicity of other contexts.
Three sets of space-time coordinates 1. space-time coordinates of the context of production
2. of the televisual message itself
3. of the diverse contexts of reception
Space-time interpolation: continuous process of splicing together these three sets of coordinates. Example: viewing television: recipients splicing togheter the different sets of space-time coordinates.
Monological character Structural asymmetry between producers and receivers. No reflexive monitoring of the other’s responses. Recepients at liberty not to pay attention. Quasi-participation.
ORDER THIS ESSAY HERE NOW AND GET A DISCOUNT !!!