Introductions / Technology

Free-range questions …

What are some communication forms (or technologies) that you would define as new?
What makes them new?
What makes them different from older forms? What key characteristics contribute to their “newness”?

What makes these new, significantly distinct communication forms worthy of study?

* What makes them intellectually interesting?
* Or … what interesting questions can you ask about them?

Some scholars (including Chaffee and Metzger, whom you'll read at the very end of the semester) suggest today’s media are “demassified,” which raises interesting intellectual questions about them. Among the differences between old and new media forms:

 
Old
New
CHANNELS
Few
Many
AUDIENCE
Unified
Diverse

CONTROL

Sender
User
TRANSMISSION
One-way
Interactive
 
Time-specific
On demand
MOTIVATION
Arousal
Fulfill needs
LEARNING
Social modeling
Experiential

“The new media bring challenges to our old models, as well as the occasion to re-evaluate, extend, and perhaps even supercede them” (Chaffee and Metzger, 2001, p. 378)

Morris and Ogan also see opportunities to rethink traditional mass media theories, including:

Uses and Gratifications: Audience members actively choose to use particular media (or particular bits of media content) in particular ways to fulfill particular needs at particular times.
Agenda-Setting: The media have a powerful role in determining what not so much what we think, but what we think about. Only a limited number of items can occupy the media agenda at a given time.

... and traditional conceptions of connectedness, including:

Social Networks: People are connected with each other in complex networks, which the online environment facilitates in ways ripe for exploration.
Social Presence and Media Richness: The degree to which we are “present” to one another in a mediated environment relates to the number of sensory cues the medium allows. (For instance, videoconferencing provides a “richer” environment than an e-mail listserv.)
Interactivity: Perhaps the most fundamental attribute of many new media forms, interactivity involves the two-way nature of communication.

Rafaeli (known best for his conceptualizations about interactivity) offers his personal list of key aspects of the Internet that make it worth studying:

Its multimedia, multifaceted sensory appeal.
Its non-linearity.
Its anti-censorship structure.
Its synchronicity (or lack of it).
Its interactivity.

Newhagen adds, as sort of an umbrella category, the Internet’s digital nature.

Schneider and Foot focus on methods, or approaches to research into new media technologies, rather than theories. They suggest the Web is simultaneously ephemeral and permanent, and they urge a "socio-cultural" approach to studying it that considers both context and discrete forms and structures.

In particular, they recommend what they call a "Web sphere analysis" that enables researchers to study both the actual forms or artifacts of communication and the relationships among communicators. They emphasize the "co-productive nature of new media," or the fact that online producers and consumers are one and the same.

The three book intros and initial chapters offer three different topical and stylistic approaches to studying the Internet. But some of the overall themes are similar:

Web Theory offers, in the introduction, two theses for considering the Web:

* The loose Web, the idea that the medium contains countless constituent parts that are interconnected in intricate, fluid ways.

* A cultural production thesis, which is like uses and gratifications in emphasizing an active audience of producers / consumers.

Society Online, in addition to offering baseline info about how we use the Internet, proposes an "embedded media" perspective: It's all about how we use the medium. The authors emphasize three aspects:

* Fit, that new media suit our daily routines and existing social habits. (Other researchers refer to the process of "normalizing" a new media form.)

* Status, that (again) we both produce and consume political, economic and social information.

* Link, that the medium is a connective device, linking people to one another as well as connecting different spheres of our lives.

On the Internet is more downbeat about technology and its role in our lives. In particular, the author challenges the desirability (or even the possibility) of separating our bodies, or our physical presence, from our social interactions.