‘New’ so much better than ‘old’ don’t you think. Or is it?
So this week I’ve been trying to capture the actual terms, and hence have an informed social analysis, about the social and cultural consequences of digital technology.
‘New media’ as a turn of phrase seemed to provide the right level for what I have been researching and analysing as the promotion of interactivity and connections between individuals across well ‘new media’.
These interactions are at a pace and for the most part informalised level and style, that is part of what I am formulising as a form of social pushing. So ‘Pushing’ in that you feel compelled to join up and be a part of networks of links, and to be seen to be responsive and ‘popular’ within those networks. By this I do not mean ‘popular’ in the sense of MySpace ‘friend’ whoreness, but rather a popularity focused on the significance of your place and role within ‘that’ network of links.
You might only have 5 friends on Facebook, 10 Twitter followers and 2 mobile phone numbers that you are in regular communication, but you remain the essential pivot in such connections and that is a significant social consequence. So back to ‘new’ again. What is occuring (at a rate of knots) are inherently interactive (and addictive) ‘demands’ that drive these links and means that the user experience is one that is participatory, culturally immersed and socially integrated as part of a tipping point of a ‘new’ sociabilty.
An important element of this ‘tipping point’ is the integration of new terms of language (so we can talk about it!), together with the development of new social practices and new research contexts in order as a way to grips with the prominence of new digital media.
Oh ‘new’ you were providing such a handy little catch all, or so I thought!
So let’s back-track to give some context, the term ‘new media’ itself came into notoriety when the 1990s .dotcom boom mania reached its peak and well then boomed. So one of the problems with the ‘newness’ of ‘new’ is that it holds implicit that all ‘other’ media is now ‘dead’ or has at least been replaced and is therefore of little consequence.
In a way this is a case overlooking what Miss Shirley Bassey sang as ‘…it’s all just a little bit of history repeating’ as what appears ‘new’ has its roots in what has gone before. She was onto something that Miss Bassey, as ‘new media’ contains the repetitions and add-on’s of previous media that are very much of relevance today. Web 2.0 being the classic example, there could not be open-source and intuitive navigation without the rather clunky point and click of Web 1.0.
Talking with the social theorist Scott Lash, he recently referred to the notion of a ‘new’ new media. Whilst this may seem an extra extraordinariness what he drew attention to was the compulsion that ‘newness’ forges. A compulsion that forces recognition of new and emergent sociabilities that are taking place when attached, ‘tethered’ and immersed to and within such new, new media.
And so I’ve come full circle to conclude that ‘new’ is a useful term. I might be over-using it though, but that’s nothing new…
About Dr Mariann Hardey
I hold the position of Lecturer in Social Media Marketing at Durham Business School. I also spend too much time enjoying social technologies, media+ stuff. That'll make me a Geek then. And a gal.
Web | More Posts (80)
