11 thoughts on “Week 3 – Media and Social Change (T4)”
Tay Ying Ying
In the early days, newspaper is used mainly to spread ideas. However, according to Jurgen Habermas, “Newspaper changed from mere institutions for the publication of news into bearers and leaders of public opinion – weapons of party politics.” In today’s context, many of us watches news and read it. We trust the newspaper as a reliable source of information. In the light of this, politicians at the national and international levels, use media manipulators and public relations consultants to feed news to journalists, with the ‘right’ kind of stories and information so that readers will buy them. The media therefore not only reflects but creates reality by working in tandem with other powerful social institutions. For example, on 23rd July 2011, two high-speed trains travelling in Wenzhou collided. In this accident, 40 were killed and at least 190 were injured. However, a week after the crash, the China propaganda department issued a directive banning any reports on the accident.
The imposition of restrictions usually means that the case will either be hushed up or dealt with summarily. Hence, state will not leave a very bad impression on its citizens and still be able to gain their trust in the future. Through this, we can see that states and governments may hide certain truths from the citizens for the sake of their interest. Hence, the media actually helps to make politicians more accountable for their mistakes to a wider range of people. This may not necessary be a good thing because citizens may be unable to get hold of full stories and hence, unable to make appropriate judgements.
Dionne Cheah
In Thompson’s article, he discusses how studies of ideology focus on the interrelations of meanings and power, specifically the meanings which powerful groups or individuals can mobilize to sustain the existing relations of domination.
He points out that in the analysis of ideologies, interpretation has a “role of creative synthesis”. During the process of interpretation, different pieces of the puzzle must come together. Other than understanding the symbolic constructions and relations between agents or groups within the society, the socio-historical circumstances must be considered as well. When all these are combined, we can then comprehend how the meanings of the constructions reinforce power relations in a particular society.
Thompson also mentions how meanings of any symbolic construction are not a given. That is to say, everyone can interpret ideologies very differently, even if individuals are situated in the same socio-historical context. The same applies for any messages that are transmitted by the media. Sometimes the intended message may not reach the audience properly, since their meanings are subjective. So while some critical social theorists view mass communication as an “ideological apparatus” to reproduce social order, Thompson reminds us that individuals still have autonomy to decode the transmitted messages.
Interestingly, the interpretation of ideology will always be a realm that is contested, and the process has the potential to interfere in the relations of domination that the ideology itself serves to sustain. Finally, Thompson notes that such interpretations are crucial because they open the possibility of critique (of domination) and allow individuals to critically reflect on the media messages that they receive daily.
Russell Lim Fang Yu
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
____________________________________________
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context, there is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
And… The media is the message?
It is funny how “Public Opinion” greatly differs from a non-government linked news site such as Yahoo! News:
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
…to say, PM Lee’s facebook page:
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – “Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!”
😀
Lim Russell
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
———————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
Gareth Nah
In “The Act of Invention: Causes, Contexts, Continuities and Consequences”, White highlights the potential for various forms of technologies and inventions to be used beyond their originally intended purposes. Indeed, a new technology “merely offers opportunity”, but does not necessarily prescribe the limits of its usefulness and function. As humans, we possess the power and potential to master and exploit these new technologies. Any such developments, therefore, take on the role of merely tools for further progress. Take for instance White’s mention of the seemingly mundane and ordinary stirrup. Although originally used merely to aid stability, it subsequently went on to play a major role in the shaping of warfare. Similarly, consider the function of clothing, which has become so ubiquitous and ordinary in our lives. We often do not give a moment’s thought to the purpose of the clothes we wear, instead unquestioningly get dressed in what we deem appropriate for each occasion. In living our daily lives, we often neglect that clothes were originally used for warmth and protection. Today however, we pay more attention to factors such as design, comfort and even appropriateness, certainly not issues considered when clothing technologies were first developed.
Thompson is concerned with the role of social and institutional contexts in shaping our understanding and interpretation of media stimuli we are bombarded with. He suggests that such messages are not necessarily set in stone, but rather socially constructed. He suggests that mass communication involves three broad aspects of production/diffusion, construction of the message, and reception/appropriation of the message.
Thompson’s work may be viewed as a complement to White’s discourse on how we as humans manipulate the technologies available to us. Indeed, Thompson illustrates how the production of media messages may not result in the reception of these messages in the ways originally intended or expected during the production process. An example of this may be observed in the local news coverage of SMRT Corp’s ongoing rebranding exercise. While such an exercise was undoubtedly intended to enhance the image of the organization, some recipients/consumers of this piece of news reacted with outrage over the perceived wanton use of funds on apparent trivialities such as the paintwork on SMRT’s vehicles. Such outrage may be attributed to social-historical conditions, as suggested by Thompson, such as the spate of disruptive incidents involving SMRT’s transport operations.
The very fact that the interpretation of media messages is subjective co-opts the consumers of such messages into the production process. Indeed, consumers do not merely blindly consume media, they also form their own opinions and views. They are not merely receivers, but also have a role to play in providing feedback to shape subsequent production. This added role of consumers thus sheds some light on the power relations at play in societies, as not everyone is sufficiently privileged to have access to media messages. Such unequal access leads to unequal opportunities to provide feedback and shape subsequent production. Some segments of society are thus excluded from the production process, and are consequently ascribed less power. Those with power can then further decide, implicitly or explicitly, what should be included or excluded in subsequent media messages, further consolidating their power and decision-making privileges. This reflects Marx’s conflict theory which suggests the protection of individuals’ interests over collective ones. Elements of this may be observed in the local context, in which censorship and media regulation are prominent.
Habermas views the public sphere as the mediating platform between the state and civil society, or system and lifeworld. It is where public opinions formed, accessed and debated. Although it can be misappropriated for the selfish agendas of a select few possessing great power, it can also act as a platform to influence political actions for the benefit of society as a whole. Alas, due to the conflicting interests, especially commercial ones, of various social actors in the public sphere, competition for support is rife, resulting in phenomena such as sensationalization and dramatization of messages. However, despite these unsavoury elements, the public sphere remains an important platform for media messages to thrive.
Russell Lim
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
Russell Lim
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
James Ang
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/27/northern-cyprus-gay-sex-_n_4674361.html
Just 3 days ago, Northern Cyprus became the last European territory to decriminalize gay sex, hence declaring Europe as a continent completely free from laws criminalising homosexuality. In short, you can have gay sex in Europe without facing imprisonment. I choose this story to illustrate Habermas’s concept of public opinion, explaining how the public sphere can played a part in the state’s decisions.
According to Habermas, citizens behave as a public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion – that is, with the guarantee of freedom of assembly and association and the freedom to express and publish their opinions – about general interest. Habermas then defined newspaper and magazines, radio and television as the media of the public sphere. Public sphere, as he mentions, acts as the mediator between the society and the state.
Relating his theories to the situation in Northern Cyprus, the country had previously held homosexual acts as an act of crime. In 2008, Human Rights Activists then started a social movement named the “Shortbus Movement”. This movement aims to support homosexual activities in North Cyprus. Such movements took to the public sphere such as the Facebook and Twitter, which eventually attracted the support of the European Union. With the European Union and the public campaigning for a change in their anti gay laws, the parliament of Northern Cyprus eventually voted to legalize homosexual relations.
While there were also several other factors that pressurized Northern Cyprus to abolish the archaic policies of homosexuality, the example also shows how the public’s voices had play a part in such a change. I believe that this case exemplifies how the public sphere can act as a mediator between the state and the society.
Tan Zhuan Liang
According to White, “If technology is defined as the systematic modification of the physical environment for human ends, it follows that a more exact understanding of technological innovation is essential to self-knowledge,” implying that technology in the long run may replace human labour as it continues to be embedded in today’s contemporary society. The simple example of the Stirrup is relevant as it has led to advancements in warfare. Similar to Heidegger, White suggests that technology is seen as a means to an end to better exploit natural resources as nature itself is seen as standing reserve.
Habermas’ article sheds light on the notion of the public sphere; being the realm which public opinions could be formed and access to this information are guaranteed to society. The public sphere is a product of modernity where mediums such as newspaper has a significant role in providing a strong public sphere as it gives a voice to the people to not just participate but the distribution of public information. However in the 18th century, particularly in 1848, newspaper were used for political purposes as there was a rise in the number of political parties and while print media at large was the only mode of medium, the newspaper became a tool for propaganda. Hence the information in the public sphere has become less reliable as it is fed with private commercial interests today where the amount of advertisements is roughly the same as the amount of content in a typical magazine.
Alex Yap
The notion of technological determinism seems to be present in all 3 articles with Harbermas’es and Thompson’s readings drawing much similarity while White brings on a fresh and quirky perspective.
White’s reading was interesting and seems to draw on Foucault’s deconstruction. He provides an explanation of past inventions and the impact that they had in shaping our society today. What he accentuates is how small inventions have been neglected and its impacts have not been widely received or acknowledged. He also brings up the idea of how the knowledge and presence of inventions can actually be transferred and that these innovations can be extended.
Habermas and Thompson were similar in their idea of the dissemination and circulation of information. They look at the power relations involved and how these relations are constructed – who gets access and who does not.
Habermas places focus on his idea of ‘public sphere’ where in this sphere, people have access to the formation and expression of public opinions. This sphere helps to mediate the society and the state as the public will organize itself as the bearer of public opinions with accordance to the principles in the ‘public sphere’. He also explains how this idea allows for the development of democracy.
Thompson places emphasis on the study of meanings and how this helps to maintain the dominations relationship. He brings in the concept of social context as with different context will lead to different interpretation. It thus builds subjectivities and that the same messages can be understood and seen in many different ways.
In John Thompson’s article “Mass Communication and Modern Culture”, Thompson suggests that the analysis of ideology (in which media messages is mobilised in the interests of sustain relations of domination) can be approached through the analysis of 3 main aspects of mass communication. Thompson suggests these 3 aspects involve:
1) Production/diffusion: studying social historical contexts in how media is being produced and transmitted
2) Construction of media message: analysing discourse within media messages
3) Reception/appropriation: analysis of how different social-historical conditions affect the interpretation and use of media messages
I would like to suggest that, in the modern society today, the 3 aspects of mass communication that Thompson suggests should highlight a fourth aspect: the analysis of societal’s reception of media in relation to production. Ideally, this could be seen as a cycle, where production relations construct what message they would like to convey through media, which is then received by society, who then (coming to a full circle) directly/indirectly affects what media messages should be produced and transmitted. This perhaps can be portrayed with the rise in democratic views in having the right to voice out individual opinions.
This could be seen with the recent release of the 50 different movie posters of the James Bond series. It can be seen that initial movie posters of agent 007 most or always included woman/women in posers of seduction, which may reinstate the portrayal of what femininity should ideologically be. Yet, only in the recent few years had this change. The media message now seems to deflect in any way portraying women as sex symbols, where the most recent addition of the movie “Skyfall” had only the male Bond character on its poster, without a single woman included in it. This perhaps could reflect the recent charges by feminism, that seeks to highlight and change the way how man overly dominates their female counterparts.
It is thus valuable to analyse not just how the production, construction and receptivity of media messages as a unidirectional model, but take on a sociological analysis on how media messages are increasingly affected by the consumers of media itself, as the new co-producers of mass media.
In the early days, newspaper is used mainly to spread ideas. However, according to Jurgen Habermas, “Newspaper changed from mere institutions for the publication of news into bearers and leaders of public opinion – weapons of party politics.” In today’s context, many of us watches news and read it. We trust the newspaper as a reliable source of information. In the light of this, politicians at the national and international levels, use media manipulators and public relations consultants to feed news to journalists, with the ‘right’ kind of stories and information so that readers will buy them. The media therefore not only reflects but creates reality by working in tandem with other powerful social institutions. For example, on 23rd July 2011, two high-speed trains travelling in Wenzhou collided. In this accident, 40 were killed and at least 190 were injured. However, a week after the crash, the China propaganda department issued a directive banning any reports on the accident.
The imposition of restrictions usually means that the case will either be hushed up or dealt with summarily. Hence, state will not leave a very bad impression on its citizens and still be able to gain their trust in the future. Through this, we can see that states and governments may hide certain truths from the citizens for the sake of their interest. Hence, the media actually helps to make politicians more accountable for their mistakes to a wider range of people. This may not necessary be a good thing because citizens may be unable to get hold of full stories and hence, unable to make appropriate judgements.
In Thompson’s article, he discusses how studies of ideology focus on the interrelations of meanings and power, specifically the meanings which powerful groups or individuals can mobilize to sustain the existing relations of domination.
He points out that in the analysis of ideologies, interpretation has a “role of creative synthesis”. During the process of interpretation, different pieces of the puzzle must come together. Other than understanding the symbolic constructions and relations between agents or groups within the society, the socio-historical circumstances must be considered as well. When all these are combined, we can then comprehend how the meanings of the constructions reinforce power relations in a particular society.
Thompson also mentions how meanings of any symbolic construction are not a given. That is to say, everyone can interpret ideologies very differently, even if individuals are situated in the same socio-historical context. The same applies for any messages that are transmitted by the media. Sometimes the intended message may not reach the audience properly, since their meanings are subjective. So while some critical social theorists view mass communication as an “ideological apparatus” to reproduce social order, Thompson reminds us that individuals still have autonomy to decode the transmitted messages.
Interestingly, the interpretation of ideology will always be a realm that is contested, and the process has the potential to interfere in the relations of domination that the ideology itself serves to sustain. Finally, Thompson notes that such interpretations are crucial because they open the possibility of critique (of domination) and allow individuals to critically reflect on the media messages that they receive daily.
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
____________________________________________
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context, there is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
And… The media is the message?
It is funny how “Public Opinion” greatly differs from a non-government linked news site such as Yahoo! News:
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
…to say, PM Lee’s facebook page:
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – “Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!”
😀
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
———————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
And… The media is the message?
It is funny how “Public Opinion” greatly differs from a non-government linked news site:
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/singapore-pm-hits-back-social-media-quot-pack-065555880.html
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
to say, PM Lee’s facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/leehsienloong
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
In “The Act of Invention: Causes, Contexts, Continuities and Consequences”, White highlights the potential for various forms of technologies and inventions to be used beyond their originally intended purposes. Indeed, a new technology “merely offers opportunity”, but does not necessarily prescribe the limits of its usefulness and function. As humans, we possess the power and potential to master and exploit these new technologies. Any such developments, therefore, take on the role of merely tools for further progress. Take for instance White’s mention of the seemingly mundane and ordinary stirrup. Although originally used merely to aid stability, it subsequently went on to play a major role in the shaping of warfare. Similarly, consider the function of clothing, which has become so ubiquitous and ordinary in our lives. We often do not give a moment’s thought to the purpose of the clothes we wear, instead unquestioningly get dressed in what we deem appropriate for each occasion. In living our daily lives, we often neglect that clothes were originally used for warmth and protection. Today however, we pay more attention to factors such as design, comfort and even appropriateness, certainly not issues considered when clothing technologies were first developed.
Thompson is concerned with the role of social and institutional contexts in shaping our understanding and interpretation of media stimuli we are bombarded with. He suggests that such messages are not necessarily set in stone, but rather socially constructed. He suggests that mass communication involves three broad aspects of production/diffusion, construction of the message, and reception/appropriation of the message.
Thompson’s work may be viewed as a complement to White’s discourse on how we as humans manipulate the technologies available to us. Indeed, Thompson illustrates how the production of media messages may not result in the reception of these messages in the ways originally intended or expected during the production process. An example of this may be observed in the local news coverage of SMRT Corp’s ongoing rebranding exercise. While such an exercise was undoubtedly intended to enhance the image of the organization, some recipients/consumers of this piece of news reacted with outrage over the perceived wanton use of funds on apparent trivialities such as the paintwork on SMRT’s vehicles. Such outrage may be attributed to social-historical conditions, as suggested by Thompson, such as the spate of disruptive incidents involving SMRT’s transport operations.
The very fact that the interpretation of media messages is subjective co-opts the consumers of such messages into the production process. Indeed, consumers do not merely blindly consume media, they also form their own opinions and views. They are not merely receivers, but also have a role to play in providing feedback to shape subsequent production. This added role of consumers thus sheds some light on the power relations at play in societies, as not everyone is sufficiently privileged to have access to media messages. Such unequal access leads to unequal opportunities to provide feedback and shape subsequent production. Some segments of society are thus excluded from the production process, and are consequently ascribed less power. Those with power can then further decide, implicitly or explicitly, what should be included or excluded in subsequent media messages, further consolidating their power and decision-making privileges. This reflects Marx’s conflict theory which suggests the protection of individuals’ interests over collective ones. Elements of this may be observed in the local context, in which censorship and media regulation are prominent.
Habermas views the public sphere as the mediating platform between the state and civil society, or system and lifeworld. It is where public opinions formed, accessed and debated. Although it can be misappropriated for the selfish agendas of a select few possessing great power, it can also act as a platform to influence political actions for the benefit of society as a whole. Alas, due to the conflicting interests, especially commercial ones, of various social actors in the public sphere, competition for support is rife, resulting in phenomena such as sensationalization and dramatization of messages. However, despite these unsavoury elements, the public sphere remains an important platform for media messages to thrive.
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
http://cloudtimes.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/makerbot-3d-printing.jpg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Spm_zrjedzk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8iHAS4iGyg
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
And… The media is the message?
It is funny how “Public Opinion” greatly differs from a non-government linked news site:
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/singapore-pm-hits-back-social-media-quot-pack-065555880.html
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
to say, PM Lee’s facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/leehsienloong
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
On Inventions:
Lynn White’s article on Inventions reminds me about a piece of equipment that has appeared at our campus library recently – The 3D Printer. While White draws examples from the past technology, maybe we can talk about the future? 😛
While 3D printing is not new (dates back to the 1980s), it is only in recent times that the technology has been miniaturized for home/office use.
We can relate this to White’s perspective in the sense that:
– 3D printing seems to have its roots from conventional printing (the duplication of text and images on a flat medium, to the duplication of actual physical, tangible shapes/models)
– The context for 3D printing in the home/office environment may largely differ from industrial uses. It can also be used in conjunction with the internet, with the net allowing people to share designs from all around the world. Imagine the potential for: New Art forms, Advertising, D.I.Y. fixes and projects and Presentations. Would it be the next piece of must-have technology for the home/office?
– However, there are also consequences to think about. The biggest problem now for governments and society at large may be the fact that weaponry can be easily constructed from such printers:
– Other implications include: how certain manufacturing industries may be affected in future, such as the threat of piracy, reduced costs of manufacturing certain items and the phasing out of traditional labour (craftmanship?) As such, 3D printing does have a lot of potential for unintended uses (both positive and negative).
————————————————————————————————————————————————-
On The Public Sphere:
In the Singapore context. There is a growing awareness about the Internet voice and its role in society. In his recent address to NTU students, Prime Minister Lee showed his unease with regards to “pack behaviour” on the internet and called for ‘rules’ for the cyberspace. I can only wonder if this is a sign of things to come, that more laws will be introduced to moderate what is going to be said on the internet. :/
And… The media is the message?
It is funny how “Public Opinion” greatly differs from a non-government linked news site:
http://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/singapore-pm-hits-back-social-media-quot-pack-065555880.html
Quote from ‘Lostinsg’: – “Is he afraid of pack behavior because he does not lead those packs? It has always been the pap strategy to restrict discussions within the parameters set by them Anyone going outside the box pays a heavy price like being made bankrupt or end up in prison. So all those encouragements for public participation are either for show or the participants are planted by the pap. Until the internet comes along. The pap is really afraid of this, and the results of the recent elections made them even more fearful. So they are putting up a brave front like claiming to be thick skinned and flame proof. Mistakes are now more difficult for them to hide because it spreads very quickly on cyberspace, so the compelling urge to try to control it.”
to say, PM Lee’s facebook page:
https://www.facebook.com/leehsienloong
Quote from ‘Richard Teh’: – Mr Prime Minister well done & a very good speech to young Sporeans. Maju Singapura. I wish I m a Singaporean & not a Malaysian! Gong Xi Fa Cai to u & family. God bless!
😀
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/01/27/northern-cyprus-gay-sex-_n_4674361.html
Just 3 days ago, Northern Cyprus became the last European territory to decriminalize gay sex, hence declaring Europe as a continent completely free from laws criminalising homosexuality. In short, you can have gay sex in Europe without facing imprisonment. I choose this story to illustrate Habermas’s concept of public opinion, explaining how the public sphere can played a part in the state’s decisions.
According to Habermas, citizens behave as a public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion – that is, with the guarantee of freedom of assembly and association and the freedom to express and publish their opinions – about general interest. Habermas then defined newspaper and magazines, radio and television as the media of the public sphere. Public sphere, as he mentions, acts as the mediator between the society and the state.
Relating his theories to the situation in Northern Cyprus, the country had previously held homosexual acts as an act of crime. In 2008, Human Rights Activists then started a social movement named the “Shortbus Movement”. This movement aims to support homosexual activities in North Cyprus. Such movements took to the public sphere such as the Facebook and Twitter, which eventually attracted the support of the European Union. With the European Union and the public campaigning for a change in their anti gay laws, the parliament of Northern Cyprus eventually voted to legalize homosexual relations.
While there were also several other factors that pressurized Northern Cyprus to abolish the archaic policies of homosexuality, the example also shows how the public’s voices had play a part in such a change. I believe that this case exemplifies how the public sphere can act as a mediator between the state and the society.
According to White, “If technology is defined as the systematic modification of the physical environment for human ends, it follows that a more exact understanding of technological innovation is essential to self-knowledge,” implying that technology in the long run may replace human labour as it continues to be embedded in today’s contemporary society. The simple example of the Stirrup is relevant as it has led to advancements in warfare. Similar to Heidegger, White suggests that technology is seen as a means to an end to better exploit natural resources as nature itself is seen as standing reserve.
Habermas’ article sheds light on the notion of the public sphere; being the realm which public opinions could be formed and access to this information are guaranteed to society. The public sphere is a product of modernity where mediums such as newspaper has a significant role in providing a strong public sphere as it gives a voice to the people to not just participate but the distribution of public information. However in the 18th century, particularly in 1848, newspaper were used for political purposes as there was a rise in the number of political parties and while print media at large was the only mode of medium, the newspaper became a tool for propaganda. Hence the information in the public sphere has become less reliable as it is fed with private commercial interests today where the amount of advertisements is roughly the same as the amount of content in a typical magazine.
The notion of technological determinism seems to be present in all 3 articles with Harbermas’es and Thompson’s readings drawing much similarity while White brings on a fresh and quirky perspective.
White’s reading was interesting and seems to draw on Foucault’s deconstruction. He provides an explanation of past inventions and the impact that they had in shaping our society today. What he accentuates is how small inventions have been neglected and its impacts have not been widely received or acknowledged. He also brings up the idea of how the knowledge and presence of inventions can actually be transferred and that these innovations can be extended.
Habermas and Thompson were similar in their idea of the dissemination and circulation of information. They look at the power relations involved and how these relations are constructed – who gets access and who does not.
Habermas places focus on his idea of ‘public sphere’ where in this sphere, people have access to the formation and expression of public opinions. This sphere helps to mediate the society and the state as the public will organize itself as the bearer of public opinions with accordance to the principles in the ‘public sphere’. He also explains how this idea allows for the development of democracy.
Thompson places emphasis on the study of meanings and how this helps to maintain the dominations relationship. He brings in the concept of social context as with different context will lead to different interpretation. It thus builds subjectivities and that the same messages can be understood and seen in many different ways.
In John Thompson’s article “Mass Communication and Modern Culture”, Thompson suggests that the analysis of ideology (in which media messages is mobilised in the interests of sustain relations of domination) can be approached through the analysis of 3 main aspects of mass communication. Thompson suggests these 3 aspects involve:
1) Production/diffusion: studying social historical contexts in how media is being produced and transmitted
2) Construction of media message: analysing discourse within media messages
3) Reception/appropriation: analysis of how different social-historical conditions affect the interpretation and use of media messages
I would like to suggest that, in the modern society today, the 3 aspects of mass communication that Thompson suggests should highlight a fourth aspect: the analysis of societal’s reception of media in relation to production. Ideally, this could be seen as a cycle, where production relations construct what message they would like to convey through media, which is then received by society, who then (coming to a full circle) directly/indirectly affects what media messages should be produced and transmitted. This perhaps can be portrayed with the rise in democratic views in having the right to voice out individual opinions.
This could be seen with the recent release of the 50 different movie posters of the James Bond series. It can be seen that initial movie posters of agent 007 most or always included woman/women in posers of seduction, which may reinstate the portrayal of what femininity should ideologically be. Yet, only in the recent few years had this change. The media message now seems to deflect in any way portraying women as sex symbols, where the most recent addition of the movie “Skyfall” had only the male Bond character on its poster, without a single woman included in it. This perhaps could reflect the recent charges by feminism, that seeks to highlight and change the way how man overly dominates their female counterparts.
It is thus valuable to analyse not just how the production, construction and receptivity of media messages as a unidirectional model, but take on a sociological analysis on how media messages are increasingly affected by the consumers of media itself, as the new co-producers of mass media.