Media Technologies, Critical Reflection – 4th Week

Media has been diversifying its platforms as technologies develop, becoming ever
present in our surroundings, which, in turn, dictates our actions: production, acquirement,
consumption into a cultural experience. These changes have also turned media consumers
into creators of culture, a phenomenon called “convergence culture” that shapes the analysis
of Deuze. The dynamic nature of media work can be described as a convoluted contradictory
reality, that tend to converge: “content, connectivity, creativity and commerce”. The
aftermath of this new arrangement of behavior as well as the diffused discrepancy between
the settled roles between producer and audience that characterize the convergence media
culture, results in a confluence of all aspects of life.

The fragmentation, exploitation, and precariousness of the current working situation

in the media field is also explored by Deuze. Due partly to the globalizations of chains of
production, working in the media these days is very far from the assumptions with which
newcomers enter the industry. Leaving aside the disparities that may arise from the
audiences, products, tools, etc., media practitioners nowadays involved in all these areas are
face to face with the same problems that result from the convergence culture. It is very
difficult for them to define their audience and keep it, since the audience has access to
technology that will switch them from the status of passive acceptor to an active media
content producer. In Deuze’s opinion, if you are a practitioner who is willing to give up
power and control, as far as content is concerned, and share the creative onus with the
audience, in a phenomenon named “participative media”, you are more likely to win from the
current situation.

Deuze characterizes well nowadays media and the new pattern of work relations,
which promotes flexibility, informal networking, soft skills, in different proportions
depending on the industry in what might be defined as a transition period from the time of
classic mass media, towards the convergence of new relations. However, he is not very
precise as far future tendencies are concerned, namely where the current power negotiation
between producer and audience will lead and if we will be able to differentiate between these
categories in the nearby future.
Terranova, in her reading takes a less “status quo” stance with her Marxist analysis of
the digital space and introduces the concept of “free labor” supporting the digital economy.
Since the Internet is contributing to the increase of flexibility it has become a way where
collective intelligence has arisen. Digital formation converges with both cultural economy
and with the information industry. Nonetheless, Terranova believes this sort of economy
surges through capitalism itself, and the assembling of collective labor within capitalist
processes. She also details a new organization whose leaders are the “knowledge workers”
where those who have more insight on the Internet have potential for political power while
those who don’t are regarded as “obsolete, unnecessary, disposable”. This leads into the
discussion regarding immaterial labor, that can be found in every productive person no matter
what class one is in.

Yet, this labor is only measured by the capacity to convert it into profit: while the
labor is collective, it is differently remunerated, and profit is disproportionally appropriated.
This networked immaterial labor acts as fixed capital, which can be, historically, compared to
Marx’s “general intellect”. Accordingly, this kind of labor is a combination which capital
aims to extract as much value as possible. All media seems to rely on this kind of labor, but
the Internet also relies a lot on speed, therefore raising concerns about the Internet blurring
the essence of reality with all its immaterial conditions.

The commodity has also turn into something fleeting, “becoming more of a process
than a finished product”. Therefore, the commodity and labor are merging to become one.
But this does not mean that this free labor is exploited, since what keeps the Internet afloat is
precisely the open-source movement. This showcases just how much the digital economy
relies on free labor exhausted by late-stage capitalism, becoming more concerned with
abundance that morality.

So, in the end, I believe, we as consumers, must ask ourselves if we are satisfied with
the gratification our system of consumption provides for us, without being remunerated for
labor. Or, even, if this emotions are merely fleeting and temporary, and if sooner or later even
our most pleasurably leisure labors will simply be used for monetized expenditure.

Maria João Sousa (72399247)