|
Julian AUSSERHOFER
|
Research Assistant, Web Literacy Lab - Department of Journalism and PR, FH JOANNEUM, Graz |
Abstract
|
|
|
Weil Social Media mittlerweile ein Massenphänomen sind und über ganz spezifische Eigenschaften verfügen (persönliche Profile, simple One-To-Many-Kommunikation, & ), stellt sich die Jahrzehnte alte Frage aufs Neue, inwieweit das Internet politische Partizipation fördert.
Die Forschung ist sich weiterhin über die Antwort uneins, ich persönlich sehe das Social Web vielmehr als Katalysator für Transparenz und als Instrument der Aufbegehrenden und weniger als politisches Schlafmittel (Stichwort: Slacktivismus) und Kontrollwerkzeug der Mächtigen. In meinem Beitrag bringe ich ein Beispiel aus einem meiner Forschungsprojekte [1] konkret geht es um die Verwendung von Twitter in der österreichischen Innenpolitik und analysiere kurz zwei weitere Beispiele der aktivistischen Nutzung sozialer Medien. Abschließend gebe ich einen Ausblick darauf, wie sich durch die zunehmenden Kupplung des Social Web mit dem Web of Things Partizipation und Aktivismus verändern.
[1] http://www.twitterpolitik.net |
|
|
Friedrich KROTZ
|
Director, Centre for Media, ZeMKI - Communication and Information Research, University of Bremen |
Abstract
|
|
|
Social software is a great invention: it makes the exchange of information possible, helps to manage relations between people and offers new forms of collaborative work. But which of the well known offers in the internet are really social software? Facebook forces the people to organize their social relations in a given form. Google tries to control the whole cultural heritage of humankind. Amazon offers books for every topic, but not all books can be bought on Amazon. Apple decides which apps you are allowed to buy. And they all use their software to sell the people using it to the advertising industry. The same is true for Microsoft, Twitter and all the others.
Antonio Gramsci calls this hegemony and Foucault reminds us of internalized mechanisms of power. Indeed, in Jeremy Benthams jail, political communication cannot develop. Therefore, social software must be controlled by its users. We need at least a board of trustees elected by the users of the respective social software offer. |
|
|
Richard ROGERS
|
Professor for New Media and Digital Culture, University of Amsterdam |
Abstract
|
|
|
For the panel discussion I would like to start with two examples of what could be described as social media action formats, such as the one person protests in Russia and the art bombs around the world to protest the budget cuts on art and culture in the Netherlands. Thereafter, I take the position, however, that the capacity of social media to mobilise (political) action dissipates, when viewed through the lens of the following seven recent episodes of social media use. They are taken from discussions of social media and the American workplace, the role of social media in a mass exodus in India, the falling Facebook share price and questions of whether it will go the way of MySpace, a star athlete's hubris from a large follower count on Twitter, a Bahrain activist's recent prison sentencing for organising online, the half-life of our online data gathered by headhunting companies, and the lack of a reasonable expectation of privacy by an Occupy Wall Street demonstrator when using social media. The panel contribution revolves around the following recent quotations. 1) Workplace. "Social media have made it the norm to tell everybody everything." 2) India. "A swirl of unfounded rumours spread (…) by social media, [prompted] (…) the panic." 3) Facebook share price. "The more users a site attracts, the more others will want to use it, which creates a natural monopoly. The network effect allowed these companies to grow so fast, but the decline can be just as ferocious." 4) Star athlete. [On social media] “you almost have to live like a hermit if you don’t want to get in trouble.” 5) Bahrain. "[The] Court (…) found Mr.
(…) guilty of 'inciting illegal assemblies and organizing unlicensed demonstrations through social media Web sites.'" 6) Headhunting. "[The company] assembles a [potential employee's] dossier (…) of positive information (…) and negative information that meets delineated criteria:
online evidence of racist remarks; references to drugs; sexually-explicit photos, text messages, or videos; or displays of guns or bombs, for example." 7) Occupy Wall Street. The judge (…) ruled (…) that Mr. (…) did not have 'a reasonable expectation of privacy' under the Constitution and that posting on Twitter was akin to screaming out a window." Each episode points to the question of the diffidence in using social media, potentially narrowing its societal application.
The one-person protests are described here, http://irevolution.net/2012/03/09/digital-resistance-in-russia/, and the Facebook Artbomb page is here, https://www.facebook.com/pages/Artbomb/118332021588385.
The seven episodes of social media use have the following references:
1.http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/19/jobs/sharing-too-much-information-in-the-workplace.html
2.http://india.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/echoes-of-northeastern-violence-ripple-across-indian-cities/
3.http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/business/Sites-Like-Groupon-and-Facebook-Disappoint-Investors.html
4.http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/18/sports/ncaafootball/tyrann-mathieu-at-lsu-is-latest-college-star-to-stumble.html
5.http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/08/16/bahrain-sentences-activist-to-3-years-in-prison-for-inciting-protests/
6.http://verdict.justia.com/2012/07/17/cyber-screening-social-media-and-fair-credit-reporting
7.http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/07/19/twitter-appeals-to-protect-protestes-tweets/ |
|
|
Anita ZIELINA
|
Editor-in-Chief, NZZ |
Abstract
|
|
|
The rise of social media has not only affected politics as such, it also changes the role and purpose of media organizations and their coverage of politics and society.
I will talk about ways how media can fulfill their democratic function and raise political engagement by combining their traditional tasks – like unbiased, professional research and information – with new functions: Their “forum” function – providing and discussing different perspectives on issues. People who grew up with social media are used to getting their information at the same time when they express opinions and interact with others, on social networks or elsewhere. News organizations need to become those debate hubs, as well as enhance their presence in social media. I will briefly mention examples of successful journalistic engagement strategies in the social sphere that created or enforced a citizen movement or a political debate. |
|
|
Eva NOWOTNY
|
Ambassador ret.; President, Austrian UNESCO Commission, Vienna |
|
Chair |
|
|
