New media innovation issues and risks

This research paper, Power, media culture and new media, delves into social justice issues surrounding the democratizing effects of new media. The paper points out that new media benefits (e.g., easier access to information through widespread platforms like mobile devices) are not equally shared or distributed across class, race, or national origin. The paper also implicitly points out that the use of mash-ups along with the increasing diversity of media outlets could create a “ripe” environment for effective government-sanctioned propaganda campaigns.

Similarly, the new media environment where essentially everyone can be a “content producer” offers unprecedented opportunities for government surveillance and ultimate suppression and/or obfuscation of speech by using new media outlets as viral engines to discredit speech that’s counter to government views or objectives. The author does point out some positive reverberations from new media harmonics; and this is the alignment of human rights initiatives with new media (as embodied in such organizations like Mothers Fighting for Others). Nevertheless, the paper ends with a caution that discriminatory (and by implication, repressive) actions can re-emerge in new media, despite the overarching democratizing effects of the medium.

Does this paper relate to real estate? Not directly. It’s simply a great education piece on the broader implications of our new media economy and society.

2 thoughts on “New media innovation issues and risks”

  1. Eric — you have got to be reading more academic papers than just about anybody else in RE.net. 🙂 Kudos to you.

    But that paper… wow… makes me think that the people of UK are wasting a lot of tax dollars on paying the salary of one Robin Mansell. Cut through the horrid academic writing (“What are the main contradictions in the symbolic and material production of the new mediated environments?” WTF? Is this writing-as-obfuscation?) and her basic point is… what exactly?

    Hint comes in the conclusion:

    These are contested and we need an ongoing debate about the morality of our mediated age – a debate that leads to action aimed at moulding an environment that is more equitable and enabling for more members of the world’s population.

    Ah, so desu ka! In other words, if “new media” doesn’t lead to more socialism, more wealth-transfer, then it’s bad.

    This isn’t scholarship; it’s political activism disguised as scholarship through the use of obfuscating language. Mansell’s biases are so clear if you read through the piece with a critical eye.

    -rsh

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *