{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","title":"Media and New Capitalism in the Digital Age The Spirit of Networks","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781349379743","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","id":"8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","uuid":"8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","title":"Media and New Capitalism in the Digital Age The Spirit of Networks","normalized_title":"mediaandnewcapitalisminthedigitalagethespiritofnetworks","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9781349379743","isbns":["9781349379743","9780230106062"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":258,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/Media%20and%20New%20Capitalism%20in%20the%20Digital%20Age%20The%20Spirit%20of%20Networks","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/8a3d8546-8fbb-485e-b423-37bc08c3284a/search"},"page":{"printed_page":16,"pdf_page":22,"physical_index":22,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"4263d29594b23fff7fca608098f23cb3b0944b4c59018ec9d78be9bc9f3a8587"},"chapter":"Media and New Capitalism in the Digital Age","content":"For the postmodernists, the dissociation between signifier and signified and the constitution of an “empire of signs” (Barthes 1982) or a “hyperreality” (Baudrillard 1983) “media-ted” (Lash 2002) by network technology is at the heart of a radical social break and a move to a new “mode of information” (Poster 1990). Like the postindustrialists, they, too, uphold the emancipatory potential of this informational transformation: liberation from grand narratives, from essentialist and authoritarian bodies of knowledge about the world, from metaphysical ontologies, and from the determination of signs (Baudrillard 1975, 1981; Foucault 2002; Lyotard 1984). In the same vein, posthumanists are excited about the constitution of new subjects defined by new advances in information and communication technology. The informationalization of the body and the networking of identities allow for a more negotiated and indeterminate construction of one’s identity, for the overcoming of essentialist categories not just in discourse but in practice, and for more degrees of freedom in choosing one’s identity, which in turn opens up new opportunities for equality, especially for previously underprivileged subjectivities, such as women (Gaggi 2003; Haraway 1991, 1997; Hayles 1997, 1999; Turkle 1997). To sum up, postindustrialists, postmodernists, and posthumanists all locate network technology at the heart of a radical break in social life that helps transcend the Achilles’ heel of industrialism, modernism, and humanism, respectively.\n\nTHREE APPROACHES TO THE RE<sub>L</sub>ATIONS BETWEEN TECHNO<sub>L</sub>OGY AND SOCIETY\n\nThe approach I take in this book can be seen as a critique of these three prominent theoretical formulations inasmuch as I ask to shift our attention from the social effects of the materiality of technology to the social effects of the ideological facet of technology and investigate technology discourse. To understand the status of “technology discourse” as a sociological object of study, we need to locate this mode of analysis within the broader field of the social study of technology. Three theoretical approaches have been proposed to account for the relationship between technology and society. The most prevalent approach is that technology shapes society, thus framing the inquiry in terms of the effects of technology on society. Underlying this “technologistic” approach (Robins and Webster 1999) are three assumptions: neutrality—technology has a history of its own, its development stems from its internal dynamics, and it is therefore an asocial force, external to social power struggles (Bijker 1995; Robins and Webster 1985; Feenberg 1995); inevitability—technology determines the shape of society, reconfiguring it in accordance with its internal workings (Winner 1977; Smith and Marx 1994; Feenberg 1991); and benevolence—technological progress is human progress, as it is positive in and of itself (Robins and Webster 1999; Postman 1993).\n\n16\n\nMedia and New Capitalism in the Digital Age","previous_page":null,"next_page":17}