"The development of new/digital media means the audiences is more powerful in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against this view."
New and Digital media is a powerful source, it is becoming more advanced than ever. Through the internet, it is changing and controlling us as audiences/users, within this, they are both drawbacks and positives out of this. By the development of new and digital could mean that audiences are powerful in terms of consumption and productions but it could also mean that audiences aren't, this is what i will be discussing.
A Marxist perspective would argue that the so-called “information revolution” has done little to benefit audiences or to subvert the established power structures in society. Far from being a “great leveller” (Krotoski, 2012) as many have claimed, it has merely helped to reinforce the status quo by promoting dominant ideologies. The most popular news website in the UK by a considerable margin is the ‘Mail Online’, which receives more than 8 million hits every month and is continuing to expand rapidly – with forecasts that it will make £100 million or more in digital revenues in the next three years. Similar to its tabloid print edition, the website takes a Conservative, right-wing perspective on key issues around gender, sexuality and race and audiences appear to passively accept what the Marxist theorist, Gramsci, called a hegemonic view. When one of their chief columnists, Jan Moir, wrote a homophobic article about the death of Stephen Gately in 2009 there were Twitter and Facebook protests but, ultimately, they did not change the editorial direction of the gatekeepers controlling the newspaper.
As a pluralists view, they would believe the audiences is more powerful in terms of consumption and production due to the development of new and digital media. Audiences are seen as capable of manipulating the media in variety of ways according to their proper need and dispositions, it will be enabling them to 'conform, accommodate, challenge or reject' (Gurevich et al) this theory suggest that the classless society can do this. An example of this is through UGC. Through the use of new and digital media, audiences are becoming more active, they are willing to challenge the powerful, in terms of UGC, audiences are using social media sites such as Twitter, and using trends and hashtags to raise awareness about issues to a wider audiences; audiences are taking control and being powerful to how they are questioning the powerful. The audiences are using new and digital media to their advantage, this illustrates that are audiences are more powerful in terms of consumption and production.
Although this could be again disagreed by a Marxists, as they believe that even though audiences are in power; they're not. Marist tend to to reinforce the role of media in the reproduction of the status quo. Gramsci’s theory of hegemony would reinforce this as it states that dominant ‘media conglomerates’ feed audiences the necessary information. It suggests that audiences are not empowered through the development of new and digital media as the dominate and higher class "rule and control" the media. An example of this, is the Arab Spring revolution in 2011, this was a protest for democratisation that that agreed with the pluralists views, as audiences took to Twitter to voice their opinions about this. However, an Marxists would argue that even though audiences had done a protest and took to social media to voice their opinion, no changed happen, the result of all the audiences taking part, nothing changed in the media. So even though audience believed they were in power in terms of consumption and production, they weren't because their actions didn't lead in anything. The media/ dominate social class will always be powerful and can not be over ruled.
On the other hand, a pluralist perspective would argue that the development of new and digital media is an ‘empowering tool… an exciting and revolutionary prospect" (Al Gore). Active audiences have made sure they are in power through citizen journalism. Citizen journalism is when an ordinary member of the public comes up with a content and publishes it other viewers to see, through this it allows real footage to the audiences to see from a persons perspective that has been in the situation themselves and felt it, and it does show the rawness to it, but when it is by professional journalists themselves, the audiences are not to be made unconscious to distinguish reality from a situation (Baudrillard :hyper-reality) through the words and stories of the media that professional journalisms do make it feel like, there is a different feel to it as it would be over produced and wouldn't meet to the audiences emotions rather than when its done by original people themselves. An example of this is when the first UGC was created, it was the example of Rodney King, and African american was that was speeding, four police men were really abusive towards him, the police men battering Rodney King was caught on camera by an onlooker. From this raw footage it showed the racism from the police officers towards a black african, which now people more opened about showing and exposing professionals, they are challenging them and exposing them to a wider audiences. This reinforces that audiences are becoming more powerful in terms of consumptions and production through the developments of new and digital media.
However, marxists perspective would reinforce the theory of the hypodermic needle, they would reinforce that audiences are drip fed with information that they don't question nor think if its true or not. This is shown with the developments of online newspapers, since they are online and highly established, it can lead to consumers of the internet to be exploited with stories that are either false or really biased, this is also shown on social media networks. Additionally, these Marxists believe that a "a minority of media producers always serve a majority of consumers" (Pareto's Law), this is due to the exploitation of their power. Audiences are now becoming powerless as they have no say or control of media producers, who have the ability to mediate the content and change it for the consumers and show what they want to see. Like Alain De Botton said "how do we get popular news to be the most important" a marxists would argue that us audience are to blame in this case, its because we prefer the softer news or non-political news because it would grab our attention more than the other, we'd like to see more of the negative news (Galtung & Ruge's.) This all makes me realise that audience are not empowered but news are in control more than anything.
A pluralists would argue that institutions would allow us as audiences be more involved in the media and news especially, the option of online comments under some news issues allow the audiences to have their point and opinion across to the professionals but other viewers to engaged themselves with and have a discussion with, if they agree or disagree. This supports the pluralists view about how the role of media is promoting freedom of speech.
In conclusion, I believe that the developments of new and digital media that are becoming discovered by the audiences are becoming more advanced and intistution are adjusting to them, but audiences are slowly becoming powerful in terms of consumptions and production.
_________________
