Book Review: "Networks Without a Cause. A Critique of Social Media"
-
Upload
despina-skordili -
Category
Documents
-
view
150 -
download
0
description
Transcript of Book Review: "Networks Without a Cause. A Critique of Social Media"
![Page 1: Book Review: "Networks Without a Cause. A Critique of Social Media"](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022081811/54514cc8b1af9f72248b46e7/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
Book Review
Networks without a Cause: A Critique of Social
Media, by Geert Lovink
Despina Skordili
MA New Media & Digital Culture
Utrecht University
The emergence of the network society has been the main preoccupation of
interdisciplinary research, focusing on the new power relationships which are being
formed and the new ways of communication and exercise of control in society. The
term has been coined almost two decades ago and has been examined by multiple
scholars, most significantly by sociologists Manuel Castells and Jan van Dijk.
Providing a definition of network society is a difficult task, mainly because different
theories approach the network in different ways: as a fact or as a concept; as a
something tangible or as an abstract idea. For Castells, as it can be seen in his essay
“A Network Theory of Power”, networks are the main actors of power in the
contemporary society (2011: 773), whereas Van Dijk focuses on the individuals as the
basic units of the network society, linked in different levels of formation, such as
groups, organizations etc. (2006: 20). The evolution of new media technology has
played a major role in the examination of the network society. For Van Dijk,
information and communication technologies (ICTs) are the main factors in its
formation, as he states in the introduction of his essay “Networks: The Nervous
System of Society” (2006: 19). This idea is rejected by Castells, who emphasizes on
the “cultural materials” which influence the processes of communication in the
network society: “ideas, visions, projects, and frames” (2011: 776).
Recently, the discussion on Web 2.0 has raised academic interest in network
politics, focusing on its participatory culture and on the emergence of new ways of
social networking. Professor of New Media and founder of the Institute of Network
Cultures in Amsterdam, Geert Lovink, contributes to this discussion with a new
approach, looking at the Web 2.0 hype as a new “bubble” (2011:1), referring to the
dot.com bubble of the late nineties. In his book “Networks without a Cause: A
Critique of Social Media”, Lovink examines the ways in which we engage today with
the networks that are being structured through the new media technologies that
dominate contemporary societies. He describes an internet culture bombarded by a
constant stream of information overload (Chapter 1), obsessed with self-promotion
(Chapter 2), desperate to get noticed online, instead of propelling discussion which
can reach consensus (Chapter 3), characterized with insufficient media literacy
(Chapter 4) and critical approaching of new media (Chapter 5), unable to discover an
outstanding way of self-expression (Chapter 6) or to critically exploit the “transition
from analogue to digital” (Lovink, 2011: 22) (Chapter 7), attracted by a new online
aesthetic of quick satisfaction (Chapter 8), relying on the quick knowledge of search
engines and, therefore, unable to critically translate information (Chapter 9) as well as
to organize effective online activist strategies (Chapters 10 and 11).
At the same time, he stresses the inadequacy of current network theories,
which are preoccupied with the creation and structure of networks, rather than
focusing on the tension and conflict they bring about on society. “We need”, he
![Page 2: Book Review: "Networks Without a Cause. A Critique of Social Media"](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022081811/54514cc8b1af9f72248b46e7/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
argues, “a contemporary network theory that reflects rapid changes and takes the
critical and cultural dimensions of technical media seriously” (Lovink, 2011:23).
Consistent in his emphasis for a more critical approach, he provides a thorough
analysis of this over-hyped Web 2.0 concept, enriched with cases on blogging, social
networking websites, online activist movements, search engines and artistic projects.
Lovink’s critique in “Networks without a Cause” can be placed inside the
frames of a broader discussion concerning the political capacities of the Net. The
evolution of new media technologies has rendered necessary the reconsideration of
traditional concepts, such as public sphere, power, democracy, control. Ever since its
commercialization in the mid-nineties, the internet has been placed with the
expectation of becoming a new site of political communication, a site where the
habermasian passive consumer public (Habermas, 1996: 191-193) would give its
place to a platform of active participation, striving to reach for consensus.
This romantic idea of the internet as a public sphere has been the subject of
criticism by many scholars. Professor of political science, Jodi Dean, argues that the
concept of the public sphere is not applicable for computer-mediated communication.
The public sphere is a place where individuals come together to discuss matters of
mutual interest and take political action. According to the habermasian definition, this
action inside the frames of the public sphere is set through some norms that are
necessary for democratic practice: there should be disregard for social status,
questioning and critique of issues of common concern and inclusivity to anyone
(Habermas, 1996: 36-37). However, Dean argues that, instead of promoting active
participation, internet politics are being formulated around the interest of financial
markets. As a result: “the Net is one of the spaces where this conflict rages in full-
force. When we talk about the Net as a public sphere, we displace attention from this
conflict”. (Dean, 2003: 103). Information is indeed put out there, but there is no
discussion going on which could lead to consensus.
In the Web 2.0 era, Jodi Dean’s question “is the Net a public sphere?”
becomes “do all these online social networks really have a cause?” This is the
question that Geert Lovink seeks to answer. Therefore, his original contribution to this
discussion is exactly the suggestion of how we could exploit the potential of the Net
in order for it to become a place of participation in political communication. He gives
an answer to this criticism of the internet as a public sphere by suggesting what is
missing. By acquiring media literacy, exploiting our critical capabilities, learning how
to question online content, developing new forms of design, artistic creativity and
technological architecture, by expanding our online space against what social media,
such as Facebook, define as “social” and by strengthening the sense of community
that has been lost in the age of information overload, maybe we can still transform
these network into a place of social change.
References:
Castells, Manuel. 2011. “A Network Theory of Power”. International Journal of
Communication 5: 773-787
Dean, Jodi. 2003. 'Why the Net Is Not a Public Sphere'. Constellations 10 (1): 95-112
Dijk, Jan van. 2006. “Networks: The Nervous System of Society”. In The Network
Society: Social Aspects of New Media, 19–41. London: Sage Publications
![Page 3: Book Review: "Networks Without a Cause. A Critique of Social Media"](https://reader035.fdocuments.us/reader035/viewer/2022081811/54514cc8b1af9f72248b46e7/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Habermas, Jόrgen. 1996. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An
Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Lovink, Geert. 2011. “Networks without a cause: a critique of social media”.
Cambridge, UK: Polity