It’s kind of funny and ironic. I tend to study topics that portray why Internet is full of rainbows and unicorns (e.g., creativity, education), but when it comes to critically analyzing digital media, I tend to be skeptical and cynical. Today’s question comes from whether new media technologies have the abilities to capture culture. I tend to stay away from discussing about cultures because I don’t want to frame myself as a cultural scholar (I think people assume that because of my racial identity), but I think this is an important issue to talk about. When I’m talking about culture, I’m more concerned about exposing people to diverse racial cultures through media. I don’t know if this is because I’m currently living in U.S., but media tends to be westernized. This concept can cause ethnocentrism in which people think western culture is the best and dominant over other cultures. Thus, it is important to expose people to different cultures. From this week’s readings, this can be done through archives and interactivity.
Gane and Beer stated that archives help to transition between public and private spaces (p. 74). Culture can solely exist in private spaces (I’m sure there are still gazillion cultures we don’t know about), but it can also be in public spaces due to new media technologies. By archiving pictures and narratives from different countries, people can represent diverse cultures online. Although Bauman argues that archives are about creating individualizations, they still represent different cultural communities. Moreover, cultural communities have consistent messages and themes that one person’s posting can represent a certain community.
People can also immerse in different cultures through interactivity. Gane and Beer insisted that people should look at interactivity beyond technologies and think of it as social/psychological interactions. One of the approaches to the concept of interactivity explained that interactivity provides a chance for people to engage in interpersonal communication (p. 97). This is certainly true. Because of media convergence, people from all over the world are virtually living in one digital space. Thus, whether it is through social media or news, people can talk about different countries/cultures online. Through these discussions, people can create a greater understanding of each other.
Now this is where Grace’s skepticism comes from: I don’t think it’s possible to “capture” culture. Even though Internet has been framed as a democratic space, it is still constructed by authorities. Whether those authorities are media institutions or dominant countries, cultures are selectively represented. I agree with Gane and Beer when they talked about the issues of power/knowledge and inclusion/exclusion (p. 84). There are always going be those with and without power, which means that representations of cultures depend on who frames them. If Facebook decides to shut down tomorrow, what will happen? When I’m talking about power, it can be simple as those who have the technology skills to post content online. I think older generations can explain more authentic cultural perspectives than younger generations. However, older generations might not have up-to-date skills to use technologies to archive content or interact with others to tell them about their cultures. I think this can lose cultural authenticities. I do think that we are still even struggling to increase the representations of minority cultures in media, but we should start thinking about if archives and interactivity are enough to capture people’s beautiful cultures.
However, this does not mean we are hopeless. Little by little, culture can be captured. This is where the participatory culture comes into play; I’m fascinated by the recent (?!) phenomenon of racebending existing media characters (see the example below). Through recreating these westernized characters, other people can attempt to capture cultures. However, even for this “Racebent Disney,” the creator is White. Thus, my hope is that more non-Whites can participate in archiving and interactivity to represent their cultures (tell that to myself, right?).
Gane and Beer stated that archives help to transition between public and private spaces (p. 74). Culture can solely exist in private spaces (I’m sure there are still gazillion cultures we don’t know about), but it can also be in public spaces due to new media technologies. By archiving pictures and narratives from different countries, people can represent diverse cultures online. Although Bauman argues that archives are about creating individualizations, they still represent different cultural communities. Moreover, cultural communities have consistent messages and themes that one person’s posting can represent a certain community.
People can also immerse in different cultures through interactivity. Gane and Beer insisted that people should look at interactivity beyond technologies and think of it as social/psychological interactions. One of the approaches to the concept of interactivity explained that interactivity provides a chance for people to engage in interpersonal communication (p. 97). This is certainly true. Because of media convergence, people from all over the world are virtually living in one digital space. Thus, whether it is through social media or news, people can talk about different countries/cultures online. Through these discussions, people can create a greater understanding of each other.
Now this is where Grace’s skepticism comes from: I don’t think it’s possible to “capture” culture. Even though Internet has been framed as a democratic space, it is still constructed by authorities. Whether those authorities are media institutions or dominant countries, cultures are selectively represented. I agree with Gane and Beer when they talked about the issues of power/knowledge and inclusion/exclusion (p. 84). There are always going be those with and without power, which means that representations of cultures depend on who frames them. If Facebook decides to shut down tomorrow, what will happen? When I’m talking about power, it can be simple as those who have the technology skills to post content online. I think older generations can explain more authentic cultural perspectives than younger generations. However, older generations might not have up-to-date skills to use technologies to archive content or interact with others to tell them about their cultures. I think this can lose cultural authenticities. I do think that we are still even struggling to increase the representations of minority cultures in media, but we should start thinking about if archives and interactivity are enough to capture people’s beautiful cultures.
However, this does not mean we are hopeless. Little by little, culture can be captured. This is where the participatory culture comes into play; I’m fascinated by the recent (?!) phenomenon of racebending existing media characters (see the example below). Through recreating these westernized characters, other people can attempt to capture cultures. However, even for this “Racebent Disney,” the creator is White. Thus, my hope is that more non-Whites can participate in archiving and interactivity to represent their cultures (tell that to myself, right?).