Mediatisation is a framework to explain that the society becomes “mediatised”, in the same

way it becomes “individualized”. That means people, institutions etc, change their behavior
to suit the logics of the media. Media become more influential to, and gained in, different
spheres in society: media becomes a part of social life. This has some positive point and
negative point.
Mediatisation changes the way humans communicate because with the media they have not
restricted location. For example, I can talk to a person who live in Australia without being in
Australia, and just be at my home in France. So, for me that is a positive point because we
can discover new culture, new people without travel, it brings an open mind. However,
media reduces the people talk face-to-face. It reduces social interaction. We can be just
across a person and send him a message to ask him a question when we could have done it
by talking. That for me the negative point.
“Media logic” adjusts people’s behavior towards the needs of the medium. To have a media
coverage we know that we need to respect the media formats. For example, the politics
debate is structured for the TV with simpler political messages. The politician knows how it
work; they adapted their messages to the TV.
Mediatisation is also present in justice. In his book Croteau give an example about how
crime scene shows in media have led jury members to have unrealistic expectations of the
legal process and the presence of forensic evidence. The most of time we don’t have all the
proof we have expected, and the judgments are rendered months or even years after the
crime committed.
Fear of media scrutiny shapes communication strategies. For most of politician or celebrity
to not be pin by the media.
Mediatisation with social media changes our behavior in real life. For example, if I am going
to a picnic with my friends, I will take care of take a pretty blanket because if we take some
picture, it will be more pretty, more “Pinterest” vibes. It will be the same for the food, I will
bring pretty plates, glasses etc. Without realizing it I would have done all this because I had
seen it on social networks
To conclude, mediatization is a part of our social life, we actually don’t realize how much it
shape our minds and actions in our life.
Technological determinism
Technological determinism is an approach that identifies technology, or technological
developments, as the central causal element in process of social change. In other worlds,
scholars who lean toward technological determinism emphasize the “overwhelming and
inevitable” effects of technologies on users, organizations, and societies.
This applies to all forms of technology, most of which have nothing to do with media. From
this perspective technology produces change, albeit often through a series of intermediary
steps.
EX: the invention of the automobile might be said lead to a reduction in food prices
because the automobile “reduced the demand for horses, which edible grains”, making food
less expensive.
Technological determinism suggests that technological properties demand certain results
and that actual people do not use technologies so much as people are used by them. In this
view, society is transformed according to a technological, rather than a human, agenda.
Critics contend this cannot be true. Technology is composed of inanimate objects; it is
humans who cause things to happen by the choices they make and the actions they take.

Social constructivism
As the name suggests, social constructionism emphasizes the social construction of
technology, focusing on the role of active human agents in ultimately determining how
technology is developed and used. These analyses usually acknowledge that technology
matters, but they theorize technology and social forces as interdependent and mutually
influential. Social forces -such as cultural norms, economics pressures, and legal regulations-
fundamentally shape the ways in which technologies are designed and developed. In
addition, ordinary users influence how these technologies are ultimately used and, often,
whether these technologies succeed or fail.
Social constructionism is part of the boarder sociological perspective that sees all of social
reality as socially constructed. Specifically, social reality is produced in three steps:
- People created society through ongoing processes of physical and mental activity.
- Over time, these creations come to seem objectively real, separate from human
activity.
- People internalize the norms and values of their culture, thereby being influenced by
their own creation.
So we are influence by the things we create in part because we forget that we created them;
they seem “normal”, “natural”, and perhaps inevitable to us. However, because we
collectively create social reality, we can always change it.
Humans create technology, and even though it sometimes appears technology has a life of
its own, in fact, we ultimately have the power to alter how we use it – a fundamental
difference from technological determinism.
Social constructionists argue that users matter, too. For example, one variant of a
constructionist approach, domestication theory, suggest that ordinary users ‘appropriate”
technology of all sorts, bringing it into their homes and daily lives. In doing so they care
consumers who both connect to the outside world of commerce while asserting their own
identified through their consumption and use of technologies. Often, users end up changing
technology by adapting it in novel ways, and these actions end up influencing the developers
of future technologies.

Platforms
Second, to find content and to communicate on the internet, users rely heavily on media
platforms owned and operated by companies like FB and Google. For the most part, these
companies are not directly content creators. Instead, they deliver people to advertisers, in
effect making users the product being sold. You and your friends may be creating the
content that attract you to Insta, but Insta is selling you and your friends to advertisers. This
is a twist on an old reality: Most media have relied on attracting readers, viewers, and
listeners to sell to advertisers. Commercial broadcast television, for example, is in the
business of delivering audiences to advertisers by attracting them to their programs. What’s
different with social media platforms is that a substantial proportion of the content that
serves to attract users is produced by users themselves rather than by media companies.
So, often, the content social media users circulate, such as a news story was originally
created by a media company. When you post a link to an article you read from a news site,
perhaps along with your own comments on the article, you are, in essence, helping
distribute the content produced by that site. Indeed, in recent years, publishers have relied
heavily on internet platforms to deliver readers for their content.