Culture & Digital Media
Whenever we think about culture within the context of the 21st century, we often consider a multiplex of ideas. Social media, content moderation, art, ideologies, and their cohabitant products not exclusive to but including racism, classism, and xenophobia. But where has this complex network of ideologies stemmed from? What were the premises that guided its founding principles? And lastly, how have past meanings of culture cultivated necessary frames of reference within our current definition?
The Historical Evolution of Culture: the delineation of nature and technological advancements
The earliest historical reference of the term culture occurs in the early 19th century around the categorization of nature and technology. According to Williams culture “was used to attack what was seen as the ‘mechanical’ character of the new Culture . . . emerging [in the nineteenth century]: both for its abstract rationalism and for the ‘inhumanity’ of current industrial development”. Culture as defined in the early 19th century was used as a means of preservation of the sanctity of natural civilization and to act as a thwart to industrialization and progressive ideologies embedding itself within society. While culture attempted to unify the “natural” it simultaneously divided, excluding technology and industrial advancements from the conversation, which inevitably created a highly selective space garnering certain phenomena as just, belonging and tangible while others were not. Similarly, Williams explains “while [culture] grants recognition to certain objects, for example to things aesthetic, and gives them their due place in the world of meanings, it banishes other objects, particularly things technical, into the unstructured world of things that have no meaning but do have a use, a utilitarian function”.
From a Gatekeeper to an Infinite Conceptual Space
As society began to deeply immerse itself within technology and the digital space, the line separating nature, technology and culture found itself becoming increasingly blurry. Now as technology has entered an era where it is seen as a cultural frontier, a space with infinite capabilities for developing communities with a variety of ideologies, the definition of culture subsequently was reinvented to accommodate this shift. Culture became a word that's meaning surpassed the confines of both nature and technology. It became a conceptual space, inclusive of all compositional elements regardless of the nature of their physical make. As Williams illustrates “culture and technology were becoming less opposed than they once were, practically and theoretically. This was thanks in part to culture’s budding relationship to digital information processing, a relationship mediated initially by large-scale institutional mainframes and desktop personal computers.”
The Cultural Jigsaw Puzzle: How Theorists Define Culture
In analyzing the context of culture it’s imperative to note its fluid nature, viewing it as a composite of seemingly disjointed thoughts. Within this framework, culture is like a jigsaw puzzle as Williams argues, “whose pieces are moving in relationship to one another. New terms get introduced, older ones drop out, and still others change shape as semantic edges grind together, altering the appearance of the whole.”
However, in an attempt to somewhat unify these points, Williams proposes a general three-component rubric which defines culture as the culmination of these definitions: The “ideal” definition, which refers to how we create value systems and attributes to certain artifacts which subsequently establish a hierarchy to not only these artifacts but to individuals within social systems, the “documentary” definition, which refers to the literal (physical, quasi-physical, or conceptual) grouping of artifacts created or reimagined by a group of people, and the ““social” definition, which relates to “a particular” or “whole way of life”, the patterns of thought, conduct, and expression, including the structures of signification, prevalent among members of a collective.”
From William’s rubric, we are able to analyze culture as a composite of subcategorical definitions, each accounting for a different facet of culture. During the birth of humanism in the 19th century, culture took on a new facet as “a court of human appeal”. (Williams 1958, xviii) Within this view, culture was seen as an “autonomous realm”, one that had uncharted freedom to develop and grow in any way it desired, unbound by the confines of specific spaces and times. This conceptualization of culture bled into the Arnoldian belief of Johann Gottfried Herder that posited that “culture consists of a long, deliberate process of nurturance and growth — although now selves are cultivated rather than soil and seeds”
Technology & Culture
As time progressed, humanity began to question the sociological place for technology. In terms of culture, as technology became well embedded within the consciousness of our society, and more integral to the mechanisms that allowed culture to operate, we began to hear terms like cultural software which discuss the array of software that supports the act of generating, performing, and participating in culture.
In relation to Digital Media & Society: Content Moderation, Democratizing Social Media and Globalization
Culture as we’ve discussed, is immensely complicated and multifaceted, connecting almost all aspects of human life. In most instances, if not all, culture acts as a glue; an integral part of the social phenomena that binds social groups together, allowing collectives to weave the fabric of ideology, form cultural beliefs, artifacts and behaviors. Specifically, within the context of digital media and social media platforms, culture creates a duality of effects. Both facilitating a natural inclination to divide and polarize and a desire to cultivate globalized dogma. In the Facebook documentary, we observed how workers in third-party agencies help shape what we see on our Facebook feeds, filtering out what doesn’t adheres to community guidelines. What I found interesting and correlative to the definitions of culture described prior, is the fact that social media platforms now guide and dictate the digital community, thus molding a culture based on censorship which all tie back to profit and gain, as companies censor to “protect their community” while simultaneously allowing extremist and misrepresentative posts through in order to emotionally stir up its users increasing traffic and engagement on their site. There are huge cultural implications as a result of this, as what we see as “democratic” is not only preliminarily screened, but is published and popularized on the site because it seeds disinformation and feeds off of the audience’s emotions.
Regarding the implications of social media platforms and content moderation, I couldn’t help but relate this to the democratization of digital media. In “The Inescapable Town Square” article we see how social media can mobilize massive political and activist movements, as it depicts a protest within the midst of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s re-election. The article impressed that for Iranians this “Twitter Revolution” that took place in the midst of the re-election allowed Iran to feel “empowered and confident to stand up for freedom and democracy,”. What was interesting about this article was that it relates social communication through digital platforms that mobilizes movements to traditional oral culture. A keynote difference between both forms of culture is within its transience. As the article notes, “In oral cultures, the spoken word is passing away just as it is coming into being; it cannot be locked down or frozen…spoken word is not a thing but an event; it is not static but acts on the world at the moment it is spoken.” Then the article begins to describe the difference in cultural audiences and their implications. Personal presence as being a huge factor in both forms, as oral forms of culture are present only within the moment they are spoken. The utterance is but a moment in time and lasts for however long it lasts but after the fact, it's gone. It is a moment that happens solely in the form of gathering or discussing. Ong explains “indeed, it is literally an audience, a gathering of those near enough to hear…“oral communication unites people in groups,” whereas writing and reading “throw the psyche back on itself.”
Lastly, we have globalization which deeply impacts culture inside of the digital sphere as well as outside of social platforms. I found Facebook’s statement on globalization and the purpose of social media as a universal connecting force very telling and made me think about how similarly culture operates. As the ladder describes the globalization journey as “tribes to cities to nations….we built social infrastructure like communities, media, and government to empower us to achieve things we couldn’t on our own.” Within the same vein, I too see culture as a unit that creates a great deal of comradery, compassion, and understanding. One that acts as a building block among civilization guiding humanity towards creating principles that direct their systems of communicating. I see culture through social media platforms like Facebook, in their use of foundational principles that build communities, much like those that induce culture within society. Principles such as “bringing the world together” and “making a more connected world” developing its own ideology and values within its users. As the article goes on to say, many social entities feel that their “greatest opportunities are now global — like spreading prosperity and freedom, promoting peace and understanding, lifting people out of poverty, and accelerating science.”
Another implication stemming from social culture within the digital world that I found noteworthy outside of our class texts is cancel culture.
As a result of globalization, a set of universal ideals that we spread through conversing on social media platforms, we have created an environment in which cancel culture runs rampant. In an article titled “Why we can’t stop fighting about cancel culture.” Aja Romano references this term as culturally blocking a person of prominence from furthering or maintaining their professional career. Later Romano proposes that cancel culture is something of “an unstoppable force descending to ruin the careers of anyone who dares to push society’s moral boundaries.” here morality, culture, and society intersect which for me was reminiscent of cultural or culture-shaping messaging within the digital space. Through every cancel we make of a celerity we are performing a culture act that spreads on a global scale. As a result of canceling celebrities, we are shaping cultural morality around their name, their career, and their character. And like culture outside of the digital space, it feels like the effects of canceling are irrevocable and impenetrable. Like a continuous force that is unceasing, with no concrete parameters or reasoning.
Conclusion
As mentioned before, culture is truly a multiplex of ideas, a complex interwoven web of conceptual thoughts surrounding how we make sense of society and civilization. We have observed that through time, the definition of culture has subsequently evolved, taking shape and identifying with spaces it wasn’t able to prior. With every age and advancement, culture has taken a new shape, opening new gateways of inclusion from its original meaning that stemmed from exclusionary and purist ideals, validating natural cultivation and mitigating all technological advances, making them null and void of meaning and conceptual potency. Presently, culture takes into account many aspects of how humanity relates to society, encapsulating digital communities and interactions on social platforms as relevant to the conversation. Further adding technology to cultural terms as a way of showing our progressive evolution around this phenomena, thus allowing us to more delicately discuss the increasingly intimate relationship between culture and technology.
Within the news, culture is seen as a way of understanding different communities, and their distinct artifacts, a way of defining interaction and building belief. In terms of what work culture does as a term, I see it as a vehicle that moves society. It is a seemingly all-encompassing term that helps us understand how society functions and is foundational to how we as humans interact with each other and understand each other.
Although as I explained prior that culture can take on a plethora of meanings, in most cases, I do see the term more in lieu of bringing individuals together, not as an issue that creates polarization, radicalization and is often sanitized (censored) and then monetized. Perhaps if we had entities and spaces that allowed us to exercise those opinions freely without being censored or removed we might bring forth a more inclusive environment where individuals would gain far more understanding and acceptance for different cultures more readily. What I believe needs to be done in terms of expanding the discussion about culture, is allowing individuals to weigh in on the implications. Although culture is unifying, it boxes individuals in, classifying all rituals as a means to confirm and perpetuate their identities within one phenomenon.
Implications of Culture within the News
In “Essential Arts: The world of culture feels the impact of coronavirus” we observe how a global epidemic can reform cultural perception. On a global scale, as the coronavirus slowly creeps its way into over 130 countries, perceptions of communities inevitably have changed to reflect a more fear-based xenophobic and racist culture. Within this article we come across the cultural impact of the coronavirus within art, canceling current viewings and withholding promotions of future exhibitions. Frank Shyong reiterated this same notion explaining how “the novel coronavirus has affected cultural institutions the world over, with movie theaters and film shoots closing down” therefore, “affecting the ecosystem of cultural institutions, having implications of withdrawing individuals from cultural education”. As this quote entails, the negative social consequences of this kind of dramatic cultural shift not only affects the education of culture from an institutional perspective, but has created a hostile environment for the Asian population, as they are seen as the “reason” for the virus’ spread. Thus producing global stigma, rooted in the hegemony of fear that was perpetuated by sensationalist media coverage. Key terms that I was constantly reminded of when reading about culture in light of the coronavirus were dominant/popular culture and hegemony. As popular culture is shaped by the ideology of a hegemonic community, when this group spreads feelings of panic, anxiety, and fear targeting one population, we start to fuel racism, classism, and xenophobia. This has specifically happened as a result of hegemonic opinion in media coverage of the virus which has spurred dozens of hate crimes and a fear culture rooted in racism. Now because of this new found fear culture we see a spike in cultural racism viewing incidents globally where individuals are wrongfully judged based on their ethnicity like the incident at Lorenzo, a popular living space for Chinese international students in which an emergency vehicle responded to a false COVID-19 claim.
<iframe width=”476" height=”267" src=”https://abc7.com/video/embed/?pid=5885787" frameborder=”0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
As Frank suggests “the public expression of fear follows a specific formula. Panic over infectious disease tends to flow into the same channels, which over time settle into familiar narrative grooves,”. And this he posits “is one of the weirdest effects of social media on society.” “Our opinions used to sit safely inside our heads, only occasionally causing trouble at the Thanksgiving dinner table. Now they war on our feeds every second, colliding and creating social frictions we’ve never experienced before.”
Notes
Kabc. (2020, January 28). Coronavirus scare at USC prompts school officials to issue statement refuting false report. Retrieved from https://abc7.com/5885770/
Lindgren, S. (2017). Digital media and society. Sage.
Miranda, C. A. (2020, March 7). Essential Arts: The world of culture feels the impact of coronavirus. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/newsletter/2020-03-07/essential-arts-culture-coronavirus
Romano, A. (2019, December 30). Why we can’t stop fighting about cancel culture. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate
Shyong, F. (2020, February 3). Column: Coronavirus, the outbreak narrative and how our fear fuels our xenophobia and racism. Retrieved from https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2020-02-03/coronavirus-outbreak-narrative-xenophobia
