New and digital media can be
defined as a multimedia experience where individuals can access any content
portably, such as through smartphone, tablets, IPad etc. Pluralist’s argue that
the mass media offers a range of products, giving consumers across the world a
diversity of choice and the opportunity to create and distribute their own
media products. For example, Web 2.0 is significant in allowing the audience to
become producers of their own media texts. However, Marxists take a different
approach on the development of new and digital media, as they argue that the
media maintains the ideological hegemony and the power of the bourgeoisie in
society. For instance, the government still has a large amount of control over
the internet. This essay focuses on whether audience are more power in terms of
producing their own texts due to the developments of new/digital media or has
this ‘information revolution’ done little to empower the audience.
According a Pluralist view, one
of the ways in which the audience are more power is through the manipulating
the media. The development of new and digital media has made the audience
actively engage with media texts as they now have access to plural views of
society. For instance, the audience can now conform (accept dominate values if
they wish), accommodate (question society’s values) or reject (have an
alternative lifestyle). Significantly, this establishes that the audience are
more power in terms of consumption and production because the rise of new and
digital media has given them the opportunity to manipulate and reject the
dominate ideologies produced by the mass media. Notably, the development of new
and digital media has made the “internet an empowering tool” (Al Gore) which
establishes that the audience have more freedom to ‘pick n mix’ whatever point
of view suits them and they have more choice and knowledge available to them. Similarly,
Krotoski (2012) stated that the “web is more than an empower tool as it shows
no authority”. This shows that resist authority conveys that there is no
hierarchy on the web which would give increase democratization in society as
individuals have more freedom in expressing their views. Thus, it can be argued
that the audience have come more power through the development of new and
digital media. This is because, they can manipulate and challenge the dominate perspectives
in society and not passively accept the ruling class ideologies.
However, Marxism criticises
Pluralists view as they argue that this ‘information revolution’ has not made
the audience power. This is because, the mass media still maintains the
dominate ideologies of the ruling class. According to Marxist Millband, the
media plays a vital role in spreading the dominate values of the ruling class
as they have control access over the knowledge the audience receive. Thus, this
encourages the audience to accept that there is an unequal society which makes
them powerless. One could argue that the development of new/digital media does
not entirely mean that the audience are power in terms of consumption and
production as the mass media ensures the dominance of certain classes. An
example of this would be The Frankfurt School Study (1930’s). A group of
philosophers were concerned with the impact of the rise of the media industries
on society. They argued that capitalism controls everything and culture is
processed through the mass media, thus the audiences are powerless as they are
indoctrinated by society. This could be linked to the hypodermic needle model
as it further portrays the audience passiveness in accepting mainstream values
and the hegemonic view of the bourgeoisie which refers to Gramsci concept.
Evidently, the audience are not powerful in consumption and production despite
the developments in new/digital media, as they still conform to the dominate
ideologies transmitted through the mass media.
On the other hand, Pluralists
argue that the media content is not driven by dominate ideology or the interest
of owners, but caused by audience figures. This implies that the media will
serve what is right to satisfy audiences taste. The rise of citizen journalism
and user generated content (UGC) has made the audience more powerful in terms
of consumption and production through the developments of new/digital media.
This is because, individuals can now make the news themselves because of
developments in technologies such as smartphones. Thus, this establishes the
concept of UGC as consumers are now creating their own content. An example of
this would be the Rodney King incident (1992) as an individual took the footage
from his phone. As a result, this led to a rise in UGC as people across the
world was able to access the video through the social networking site, YouTube.
In contemporary society, majority of people are citizen journalists as they
film videos on their phones and upload it on social networking sites for people
to produce a discussion and socially interaction. In relation to Katz and
Blumler Uses and Gratification theory, the audience would use the media for diversion,
personal relationship, surveillance or personal identity, thus highlighting
that they are active agencies. Significantly, according to Pluralists, this
establishes that individuals are empowered by the development of new/digital
media, as they are actively producing their own content instead of being
restricted by social agencies.
In relation to this point, Chad
Herly (Co-Founder of YouTube) stated that “YouTube has increased UGC” as there
is “more than 1billion hits per year”. This is vital in highlighting that
audiences are more power as they are producing their own content on to social
networking sites and therefore they are actively engaging with the developments
of new/digital media. Additionally, the Arab Spring further shows how a
development of new/digital media has made the audience more power because of
UGC. Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter gave individuals the
freedom and power to politically express their views. As a result, this
triggered the protest in Egypt and Libya. According to Phillip Howard the “new
media has made a difference to countries in the Arab Spring as it has changed
the way people think about their options”. Thus, this has created more
democracy in countries as citizens are rejecting the dominate values and are promoting
their own alternative ideologies. Moreover, through UCG and citizen journalism
the “web is inventing society” (Krotoski 2012), giving people more power to
create and share their content through new/digital media. Evidently, this shows
that owners do not have direct control over the content of the media, as
consumers are producing their own. Thus, this establishes that the audience are
in power.
One could justify, that the development
in new/digital media has done little to make the audience more powerful as the
fail to challenge the power structure in society. This is because, there are
still many conglomerate in the society which has an influence on the media. For
instance, the ‘Mail Online’ owned by Rupert Murdock is the most popular and
successful website in the UK which recently had an increase of 150million users
in October. The print edition takes a conservative right wing perspective on
fundamental issues around gender, sexuality, race and favours some of the
British National Party policies as well. Significantly, some of the audience
passively accept the Daily Mail print and online edition values which
establishes that they are not powerful. Moreover, Daily Mail chief columnist
Jane More wrote a homophobic article about the death of Stephen Gatey (2009)
which caused an outrage on social media. According to The Guardian, the article
attracted more than 500 comments on the Mail website as the public was livid
about this issue. However, the ‘Daily Mail’ did not change the editorial
process based on More offensive article, thus allowing gatekeepers to keep
control over the newspaper. Thus, it can be argued that the “web mirrors the
hierarchy of the real world” (Krotoski 2012). According to a Marxist
perspective, most journalist are white, middle class and are socialised into a
set of professional values which share assumptions in maintaining the dominate values.
The audience are exposed to a limited range of opinions which are associated
with the dominate ideologies and are unconsciously persuaded to perceive the
dominate ideologies as the view of the world. As a result, the hegemony of the
ruling class ideas are maintained which establishes that the development of
new/digital media has not made the audience powerful in terms of consumption
and production.
In contrast, developments of
new/digital media has made audience more powerful as they are now actively
producing their own content on the internet and therefore have more freedom.
Online blogs, forums, global information and social networking sites has
increased self-expression for the audience which establishes that they are
active consumers and therefore are powerful.
Through the developments of new/digital media “the web has the power to
show people’s different views” (Kroteski 2012). It could be suggested that the
audience are no longer passive as they can now actively challenging to dominate
ideologies through social media. Significantly, “shared activity or
crowdsourcing on the internet has enabled people to come together and to solve
problems” (Wesch 2008). An example of this would be the 2011 Twitter campaign
which caused thousands of citizens onto the streets of London to help clean the
mess after the London riots. Thus, it can be argued that the development of
new/digital media has empowered the audience. This is because, they can now
actively produce content through social media which allows them to get their
messages across to the public.
Conversely, society has become
media-saturated as the media has become an important source of information and
entertainment, which has made the audience passively accept mainstream
ideologies. The USA reality show ‘Keeping up with the Kardashian’ focuses on
the ordinary life of a wealthy family, allowing the audience to feel
entertained and divert from their everyday routines. One could argue that this
show presents Marxism dominate ideologies of the ruling class such as, capitalism
and the traditional family type. The Kardashian family are represented as the
desirable group in society which is made evident through their have a luminous
house, cars, clothing’s, and jobs. It could be suggested that this
representation brainwashes the audience into accepting that there is a social
class divide in society of the bourgeoisie and proletariats. Thus, this
highlights that the audience are passive consumers of the media. Similarly, Big
Brother also establishes that audience are powerless as individuals are monitored
by surveillance cameras. As a result, their behaviour is control by technology
and therefore they are not free agents. Furthermore, in China the government
heavily censors and filters web content which establishes that the individuals
have little freedom. Thus, this makes the audience powerless in terms of
production and consumption.
Overall, it can be argued equally
whether developments in new/digital media has made the audience powerful in
terms of consumption and production. Some may agree with this statement as the
audience have more freedom to actively engage with the media. This is clearly
established through Pluralist perspective as “the audience are seen as capable
of manipulating the media in an infinite variety of ways according to their
prior needs and disposition” (McQuail). In contrast, others would argue that
the developments of new/digital media has done little to give the audience
power as they are still passive consumers of the media. Marxism makes an
important contribution to the issue as they recognise that the media plays a
vital role in brainwashing the audience to accept the dominate ideologies of
the ruling class. Evidently, this shows that the debate over this issue is
still unresolved.
