Broadcast Yourself Final

8/21/2019 Broadcast Yourself Final

1/24

Pre-print of published chapter appearing inUsha Rodrigues (ed)

Youth and Media in the Asia-Pacific Region,

Cambridge Scholars Press, Cambridge, 2008

broadcast yourself: moral panic, youth culture and internet studies

Catherine riscoll ! "elissa #regg

$ot all relations bet%een media and &outh culture begin %ith geopolitical locations or

geopoliticall& located communities of media users' r, at least, the geographical

dimension of the geopolitical location of &outh culture and media spheres does not

al%a&s centre on the state or region' n this chapter, %hile %e are %riting from the

perspecti*e of +ustralia and the +sia-Pacific more broadl&, our terms of reference are

transnational, taing up mediaspheres and cultural and economic flo%s that dra%

discussion of media and &outh culture a%a& from the nation-state, a%a& from the location

of &outh communities in a single simultaneous time and space, and indeed a%a& from a

single simultaneous definition and eperience of .&outh/'

$o consideration of the +sia-Pacific, &outh and media can remain tied to ho% this region

is different from others and in this chapter %e consider the place of &outh %ithin broader

mo*ements in online media' *en if %e set aside for the time being the %a&s in %hich

online media formats and practices are con*erging %ith or engaging other media spheres,

attempting to spea about cultural differentiation across online culture in the same terms

one might still use for radio or tele*ision or e*en popular music seems e*identl&


2/24




problematic' +n& clear differentiation of %hat &outh means for and %ithin online culture

bet%een +ustralia and the United States, or +ustralia and China, seems difficult to 1ustif&

ecept in highl& specific eamples' Such eamples can clearl& pro*ide interesting case

studies but, for eample, a comparison of the use of protectionist discourses on &outh to

1ustif& internet censorship in China and +ustralia still raises more intriguing similarities

and connections than differences' +nd so our focus in this chapter is not on the

uniueness of the +sia-Pacific eample, but on the .global/ flo%s %ithin %hich the +sia-

Pacific eperience of &outh in and as online media must be contetualised' 3et us begin

%ith that hub of at least rhetoricall& .global/ flo%s, the United States of +merica'

Introducing The YouTube Generation

n "arch 22nd, 2004, 5on Ste%art6s The Daily Show featured a piece b& .&outh

correspondent/, emetri "artin' 7ramed (comicall&) as .serious ne%s/, this %as a report

on the legal action bet%een iacom, o%ner of the U'S' cable channel Comed& Central

that produces The Daily Show, and #oogle, the compan& that o%ns 9ou:ube' n staging

co*erage of the implications of iacom suing o*er .unauthorised/ distribution of its

content b& 9ou:ube users as an issue for the &outh reporter, The Daily Show reproduced a

dominant image not onl& of 9ou:ube users, but of participants in a .ne% generation/ of

online culture' :he suit, the .&oung/ users of 9ou:ube, and those %ho didn6t participate

in such online culture %ere all ob1ects of parod& in this sit, %hich staged a satiricall&

recommended (.to the ids out there/) home-made ail& Sho% before closing %ith 1oes

at the epense of an .older/ generation that doesn6t file-share' ;hen "artin protested that


3/24




net he6d ha*e to pa& for music, Ste%art replied, .emetri, believe that &ou do ha*e to

pa& for music,/ allo%ing "artin to uip< ."an, &ou are old, %hat6s up'/

:he contemporar& mediascape is a difficult place to map along the lines familiar to state

politics and e*en trans-national media industries' t is no% difficult to identif& clear

boundaries bet%een mainstream and alternati*e media (%hich, for eample, is

"&Space=), bet%een state-based points of origin (is ;iipedia .+merican/, and in %hat

sense=), and e*en bet%een %estern and non-%estern (%here %ould %e place trans-

national gaming sites lie Pla&station #lobal=)' >ut in the uses to %hich the media is put

e*er& da&, including in %hat .the media/ sa&s about itself, there are some emerging

distinctions that seem important' ne of the most pre*alent is bet%een media for %hich

users generate the central content and media %here the content is produced b& paid

professionals' :his is not a hard and fast boundar&,? but it is an important difference

bet%een media forms lie "&Space, ;iipedia, or Pla&station #lobal, on the one hand,

and >>C %orld ne%s, The Los Angeles Times online, or The Daily Show on the other'

:he media on both sides of this di*ide o*er%helmingl& discuss this as part of a long-

standing distinction bet%een .&outh culture/ (meaning in this sense &outh-directed media

and popular culture) and that %hich is not .&outh culture/ and thus both .mainstream/

and .adult'/ n this chapter %e %ant to as ho% this split is imagined %ith reference to

online sites, identities, communities and practices' n doing so, %e6re looing to

? :he increasing pre*alence of .cro%d-sourcing/ is part of this blurring of professional@amateurdistinctions, not to mention the other forms of sacrificial or *oluntar& labour integral to the production and

de*elopment of online and other digital media cultures, see :itAiana :errano*a, B7ree 3abour< Producing

Culture for the igital conm&,B Social Tet ?8, no' 2 (2000)'


4/24




understand %hat online culture is presumed to be and %hat the use of generational

distinctions means for these discourses' Such an o*er*ie% is necessaril& highl& specific

in historical and geographical terms' ;hether %e are interested in mapping online culture

itself or simpl& the discourse on online culture, %hat %as telling fi*e &ears ago is often

redundant or insignificant toda&' So too, %hat is telling of the +ustralian eperience of

these phenomena %e regularl& access %ill differ from that of other cultural formations in

the +sia-Pacific region and &et such differences can not be understood b& an& umbrella

understanding of geographical location of cultural differentiation'

"artin6s sit addresses a $orth +merican audience at one le*el but also a much %ider

and unpredictable audience online' t manifests a no% familiar narrati*e about online

generations as %ell as a comple set of echanges bet%een media producers, pla&ers,

forms, sites and users' :hrough these interactions, the generationalised internet is tied to a

broader mediasphere at the same time as it is percei*ed as cruciall& different' 7or

instance, Comed& Central6s %ebsite no% hosts selected clips from The Daily Show as a

substitute for the .unauthorised/ copies that had been a*ailable on 9ou:ube' :he site

features a star rating s&stem for such clips as %ell as other feedbac mechanisms that

mimic those populariAed b& ;eb 2'0 platforms lie 9ou:ube' :hese inno*ations clearl&

dra% on no%ledge about internet generations at the same time as the sits broadcast on

the sho% moc them' +nd it is these intricacies that are hard to recognise %hen debates

are framed b& an us *s' them, &outh@pirate *s' mainstream@legitimate opposition

characteristic of much co*erage of these issues'


5/24




Part of %hat %e %ant to unra*el here is the simultaneous obsession %ith and presumption

of &outh perpetuated b& public and popular representations of .global/ online

participation' :hese characterisations impl& that online beha*iour taes place in an ther

(unno%n) space, dangerousl& adrift from established forms of social interaction (and

hence sur*eillance, regulation and discipline) and that .9outh/ is their most reliable and

helpful label' +t the time of %riting, 9ou:ube acts as the archet&pe of this phenomenon'

ts status as a point of origin for a .moral panic/ is e*ident in the sheer number of fronts

for aniet& it harbours, %hether for established media outlets lie Comed& Central

(because of its status as an unofficial archi*e for distributing cop&righted content)

emplo&ers (concerned about the misuse of %or infrastructure or the compan& name)

and schools (e'g' in the recent use of 9ou:ube to circulate raciall&-moti*ated re*enge

attac *ideos amongst ri*al gangs in S&dne&)' n this en*ironment, the possibilit& of a

critical account of online culture has been constrained to the etent that academic

approaches ha*e also replicated this fetishisation of &outh' :his has left us ill-prepared to

consider the important larger changes affecting our identities across age groups, changes

for %hich alarm is perhaps the least useful reaction as much as age is the least re*ealing

means of apprehension'

Youth, leisure and moral panics in internet studies

:o build the foundation for this perspecti*e %e begin %ith some initial responses to the

.panic/ o*er social net%oring sites that dominate current media co*erage of the

acti*ities of .%ired/ &outh' Dere the most appropriate starting point is the uotation that


6/24




launched a flotilla of papers, articles and other more or less academic engagements %ith

the online friendship hub, "&Space< .f &ou6re not on "&Space, &ou don6t eist'/ n

man& %a&s, the alarm bells triggered b& this uote had to do %ith parental concern about

the internet6s potential to mirror, or indeed offer a ne% a*enue for, traditional school&ard

pressures lie popularit& contests and bull&ing threats' :he specific blog entr& that

generated this uoteEFath& Sierra6s "arch ?G, 200G, contribution to the .Passionate

Users/ blog on headrush Ehas been traced, lined and cited for a %ide range of

agendas' :he one %e focus on, the apparentl& re*olutionar& potential of "&Space for its

users, is introduced b& Sierra as follo%s<

1ust came bac from dinner %ith m& daughter S&ler (that6s her in the picture)'

She6s an etremel& passionate m&space user' n her %ords, .f &ou6re not on

m&space, &ou don6t eist'/ So ased %hat made m&space so compelling''' %h&

didn6t she fall in lo*e %ith 3i*e5ournal= Der ans%er is a lesson for soft%are

de*elopers (especiall& ;eb 2'0-ers), and %as a theme of SHS;<

“myspace keeps doing what everybody really wants, and it happens

instantly.”2

;hat6s fascinating here is the intersection of scholarl&, professional and popular

discourses on online culture for %hich &outh is a guarantee of authenticit& and an inde

of both re*olution and the e*er-changing present<

ased if these IcontinualJ changes %ere disrupti*e or made it harder to use %hen

nothing sta&s the same, and she ga*e me that teenage-attitude-e&e-rolling-%hat-a-

lame-uestion loo'

2 Fath& Sierra, BUltra-7ast Release C&cles and the $e% Plane,B creating !assionate user s, no' "arch ?G,

200G (200G), http


7/24




:hen she said the %eirdest thing of all< .m&space is lie a %hole ne% plane of

eistence'/

She wasn"t #idding ' L

:he italics inserted b& Sierra stress her implicit agreement, but S&ler6s role here is a

crucial one' :his .&outh/ .user/ *ersion of "&Space is in fact a .parent/ .critic/ account

%hich uses &outh as an immediate *erification for the interaction of scholarship on and

corporate de*elopment of ;eb 2'0Ean interaction that supports the commercial

imperati*e to represent ;eb 2'0 as &outhful' Sierra lins S&ler6s re*elation to anah

>o&d6s discussion of %eb de*elopment culture, highlighting the .uic release c&cles/

she thins eplains her daughter6s apprehension of "&Space6s responsi*eness'M >ut

Sierra is not merel& describing a particular mode of online de*elopment but also claiming

it either reflects or produces a massi*e cultural shift, e*en a ne% ontolog&' +t the same

time she epresses concern about this .ne%/ ontolog&, aligning user satisfaction this

online de*elopment %ith dangerous drug addiction' She calls it .Code Crac'/ :his .ne%

plane of eistence/ familiar to S&ler and her contemporaries is thus represented as a

commercial construct, as implicitl& harmful or at least cause for attenti*e concern, and as

a commodit& %ith a uniuel& positi*e resonance for the consumers %ho need it'

Such parental aniet& o*er the transient and thus onl& superficiall& attached connections

of ;eb 2'0 are reinforced in other public forums' ;hen the Los Angeles Times heralds

L Sierra, BUltra-7ast Release C&cles and the $e% Plane'BM Sierra is here referencing a paper b& >o&d on online de*elopment as a relation to consumption of

communit& anah >o&d, B#@3ocaliAation< ;hen #lobal nformation and 3ocal nteraction Collide,B in

$%Reilly &merging Technology 'onference (San iego, C+'< 200G)'


8/24




"&Space as .a place for a generation to chronicle its grief/ N it does so in order to

foreground the transient superficialit& of the mourning that taes place on "&Space and

thus, b& inference, the relationships it enables more generall&' ;hen, on The Daily Show

segment discussed abo*e, "artin presents a fae 9ou:ube profile of Ste%art .tagged/

%ith a moustache and captioned .lonel&1e%?M,/ this is not onl& a reference to the

contentious relationship bet%een 9ou:ube and .original material/ but also a reiteration

of that generational model of thining about the internet' .3onel&girl?N/ recei*ed

enormous co*erage %hen her 9ou:ube profile %as re*ealed to be not a .real/ *ideo log,

but a performance of a satisf&ingl& stereot&pical adolescent girls6 *log crafted b& older,

male professional artists'G + circular certaint& is produced hereE;eb 2'0 represents the

superficial urge for connection and comparison deemed t&pical of adolescents %ho, it is

thus presumed, are the .users/ of ;eb 2'0' :his circularit& is especiall& problematic

%hen the same presumptions are reproduced in scholarship on online culture'

n 200G, alenburg et al' introduced their approach to these uestions %ith the claim that

friend net%oring .sites presumabl& pla& an integral role in adolescent life/'4 :he& find

the dela& in etensi*e studies of such sites remarable precisel& because the& seem so

appropriate for and popular amongst adolescents<

friend net%oring sites lend themsel*es eceptionall& %ell to the in*estigation of

the social conseuences of nternet communication' +fter all, peer acceptance and

interpersonal feedbac on the self, both important features of friend net%or sites,

N Seema "ehta, B#rief, Comfort "eet on "&space,B Los Angeles Times, 5anuar& 2M 2004 2004'G B3onel&girl?N,B YouTube, no' ?2 "a& 200G (200G), http


9/24




are *ital predictors of social self-esteem and %ell-being in adolescence' :herefore,

if the nternet has the potential to influence adolescents6 social self-esteem and

%ell-being, it is liel& to occur *ia their use of friend net%oring sites'

:here is no period in %hich e*aluations regarding the self are as liel& to affect

self-esteem and %ell-being as in adolescence'8

+ range of uestions need to be ased about presumptions that the interacti*e peer

participation-based internet formats often labeled ;eb 2'0 are themsel*es adolescent' +re

.adults/ reall& not .etremel& preoccupied %ith ho% the& appear in the e&es of others/=

s their self esteem reall& not e*aluated b& satisfaction %ith .ph&sical appearance,

romantic attracti*eness, and the abilit& to form and maintain close friendships/=Q >ut the

presumption that the rele*ance of issues generated b& these sites should be understood

through the urgenc& of concerns about &outh culture does not stop here'

+ stud& lie alenburg et al'6s, for eample, selects adolescents as the group for %hom

friend net%oring %ill be most important %ithout more than common-sense 1ustification

for that and %ithout e*en interrogating the literal chronological accurac& of participants6

statements about their age'?0 "c"illan and "orrison, %hile also beginning %ith the

presumption that .&oung adults/ are the place to find ho% the .ne%/ internet %ors in

people6s li*es, at least generate some certaint& about the age range captured b& recruiting

amongst college students' Da*ing selected this group, ho%e*er, the& necessaril& find .a

gro%ing dependenc& on the internet for acti*ities ranging from managing their dail& li*es

8 alenburg, Peter, and Schouten, B7riend $et%oring Sites,B N8M-8N'Q EEE, B7riend $et%oring Sites,B N8N'?0 :his is assuming, to begin %ith, that the age group ?0-?Q is a telling or at least useful one for discussing a

particular mode of interaction bet%een peers and self esteem and@or %ell-being'


10/24




to building and maintaining *irtual communities/?? among &oung people, because it is

&ounger rather than older people the& are stud&ing' Citing :he Pe% nternet and

+merican 3ife Pro1ect, the& claim college students .are more liel& than the general

population to be online, chec email, use multiple email addresses, bro%se for fun,

do%nload music files, and use instant messaging/?2, %ithout inuiring %hether it is the

go*erning imperati*es of an educational institution that shape this as %ell as, as much as,

or instead of, age categories'

7or both these anal&ses, the .realness/ accorded to forms of technological mediation not

based on the internetEsuch as the telephone or postal ser*icesEis directl& deri*ed from

a generational model' :he .realness/ of these media is part and parcel of not being

associated %ith recent and current change, and thus in turn %ith &outh' t ma& be

indisputable that the generation .coming to adulthood/ in "c"illan and "orrison6s

stud&EcontetualiAed b& the class and other demographic tendencies of the U'S' college

s&stemEis the first for %hom online communication is an e*er&da& possibilit& (%hether

at school, %or, home or else%here)' :he emphasis on demographics intrinsic to ma1or

funded research (for %hich age is a e& paradigm) has also been o*erl& influential on the

field of internet studies and limits the possibilit& of de*eloping alternati*e parameters for

such scholarship' Do%e*er, lea*ing aside issues of cultural and regional specificit&, %hen

it comes to understanding this beha*iorEits everydayness, in the sense that media and

cultural studies ha*e studied routine, ordinar& beha*iorEsuch approaches are incredibl&

?? S'5' "c"illan and "' "orrison, BComing of +ge %ith the nternet< + ualitati*e ploration of Do% thenternet Das >ecome an ntegral Part of 9oung Peoples 3i*es,B *ew Media ( Societ & 8, no' ? (200G)< 4L'?2 "c"illan and "orrison, BComing of +ge %ith the nternet< + ualitati*e ploration of Do% the

nternet Das >ecome an ntegral Part of 9oung Peoples 3i*es,B 4M'


11/24




limited' 7or instance, Do%ard et al6s .a&s and $ights on the nternet/, appearing in

;ellman and Da&thornth%aite6s influential The +nternet in &veryday Life collection, is a

detailed in*entor& of e& acti*ities taing place online in a t&pical da&' :he authors chart

the differences in use .bet%een men and %omen, &oung and old, those of different races

and ethnic groups, and those of different socio-economic status/'?L :hese acti*ities are

then categoriAed as either .fun acti*ities/ (e'g' checing sports information,

sending@recei*ing instant messages, seeing information about hobbies, bro%sing for fun,

pla&ing a game, %atching *ideo clips, listening to audio clips, listening to music or

do%nloading it, and participating in chat rooms/, those acti*ities regarded as

.information utilit&/ (e'g' getting ne%s, ne%s specificall& about politics, financial

information, product information, tra*el information, religious and spiritual information,

information from a go*ernment %ebsite, checing the %eather) and those determined to

be .ma1or life acti*ities/, namel& .seeing information about healthcare, 1ob, housing,

doing 1ob-related research, and research for school or 1ob trainingB' ?M

7rom the point of *ie% of an&one familiar %ith internet use toda&, it is hard to see ho%

such distinctions could e*er ha*e been so easil& made< a tas lie %riting and researching

this essa& %ould fit into all three categories, for eample, as %ould maintaining a

"&Space page' Do%e*er the utilitarian taonom& of online acti*ities persists as the

grounds upon %hich much more eplicitl& interested distinctions are made' :he People6s

Republic of China6s contestations %ith ;iipedia can thus tae on the same rhetorical

?L Phillip $' Do%ard, 3ee Rainie, and Ste*e 5ones, Ba&s and $ights on the nternet,B in The +nternet in &veryday Lif e, ed' C' Da&thornth%aite and >' ;ellman ("alden, "+< >lac%ell, 2002)'?M Do%ard, Rainie, and 5ones, Ba&s and $ights on the nternet'B


12/24




frame%or as the +ustralian go*ernment6s pamphleteering o*er protecting children from

internet stalers both protecting children from un-useful uses of and bad influences on

the internet'

espite the title of Do%ard et al6s article, their anal&sis gi*e us no information about

%hat ind of acti*ities are conducted at %hat time of da& %hether or not night-time

beha*ior differs to that during %oring hours %hich ind of users log on at %hich times'

"oreo*er, %e ha*e no idea of %hat is actuall& in*ol*ed in the inds of transactions listed

or %hich can be and are taing place at the same time and repeatedl& depending on the

circumstances' .:he internet in e*er&da& life/ is represented as a fictitiousl& ordered and

neatl& chartable eperience, lacing an& of the messiness, happenstance, confusion,

surprise or multilayered com!leity that constitutes the range of online eperiences'

espite these disciplinar& differences, it is ne*ertheless clear that %ithin the frame%or

established b& the stud&, .&outh culture/ uses of the internet %ould o*er%helmingl&

belong to the first categor& (.fun/), supplemented for indi*idual &ouths b& some

acti*ities from categor& t%o or, more liel&, three, %hich the& are institutionall& or

other%ise compelled to undertae' Such a categoriAation b& utilit& meshes %ith the

parental concern approach to create a hierarchisation of online acti*ities in %hich the

&outhful online life is coded as unnecessar&, dubious and insubstantial'

:he definition of &outh culture is not a straightfor%ard one' +cross the rhetorical tropes

that dominate ;estern mediaE&outh-as-trouble, &outh-as-fun, &outh-as-future and

&outh-as-confusing tribeE&outh emerges as a liminal troubling categor& perfect for


13/24




engagement %ith the uncertainties of the future, and &outh culture as a categor& that slips

bet%een %hat loo, b& opposition, lie more stable and coherent categories'?N 9outh

culture is most usefull& defined as a field of artifacts, identities and practices %hich are

circulated by &outh as about and for &outh' *identl&, ;eb 2'0 intersects %ith but is in no

%a& confined to &outh culture, but this is barel& e*ident in mass media representations,

%here ;eb 2'0 euates to an age-based reading of the label .second-generation internet/'

:his generational discourse becomes one .about/ &outh as much as .about/ the internet,

but is less for or circulated by &outh than it is for and by a .parent/ generation defined b&

1ust this rhetoric'

Representations of &outhful life online in the popular media locate the internet as an

uncontrollable and thus o*er%helming field of endlessl& changing influences and effects'

n this, as #iselinde Fuipers reminds us,

:he short histor& of the internet is reminiscent of the histor& of older media such

as tele*ision, radio, telephone and print' ;hile eperts %ere maing optimistic

predictions about the serious applications of the ne% medium inno*ations in

business and commerce, political reform and empo%erment, scientific

communication, 1ournalistic progress, the emancipation of challenged groups,

educational applications audiences embraced the medium for a less ele*ated

purpose< entertainment'?G

?N +mong man& possible references see, as eemplar&, the introduction to 'ool Places #' alentine, :'

Selton, and ' Chambers, B+n ntroduction to 9outh and 9outh Cultures,B in 'ool Places, eogra!hies of

Youth 'ultures (3ondon< Routledge, ?QQ8)' and, %ith more reference to gendered distinctions across this

categor&, riscoll6s chapters on adolescence and mass culture Catherine riscoll, irls, .eminine

Adolescence in Po!ular 'ulture and 'ultural Theor & ($e% 9or< Columbia Uni*ersit& Press, 2002)''?G #iselinde Fuipers, B:he Social Construction of igital anger< ebating, efusing and nflating the

"oral angers of nline Dumor and Pornograph& in the $etherlands and the United States,B *ew Media


14/24




t is in its entertainment form that the internet manifests as this cause for concern and,

1ust as %ith pre*ious eamples of ne% leisure technologies lie cinema, records, and

tele*isionEand later ones lie the iPodEthis concern is principall& pro1ected onto %hat

&oung people might do %ith ne% technologies and, in turn, %hat those ne% technologies

might do to them'

Critics lie Fuipers ha*e noted that such panics are, despite the global image of the

internet that so sustains panics about it, *er& culturall& specific'?4 >eing constituted in a

relation bet%een the public sphere and the mass media, and the audiences of both,

ho%e*er insightful the concept of moral panic is it cannot remain applicable in the same

form across times and places' +s Sarah :hornton and +ngela "cRobbie pointed out in

?QQN, the media, popular culture and public sphere no longer interact in the same %a& as

Stanle& Cohen outlined, and certainl& the interaction bet%een media commentar& %ithin

and %ithout the field of that media form has changed significantl& since their article'?8

;eb 2'0 eacerbates the etent to %hich counter-discourses and e*en the identification of

moral panic form part of the fabric of the contemporar& moral panic'?Q 7urthermore, on

the internet this ind of debate clearl& cannot be restricted to the .sociall& accredited

eperts/ that Cohen identified as the main actors in the creation of moral panic' rdinar&

internet users ha*e entered the discussion as %ell' n online con*ersations and debates,

the moral dangers of internet entertainment are %eighed and discussed, do%npla&ed and

( Societ & 8, no' L (200G)< L80'?4 Fuipers, B:he Social Construction of igital anger,B L8?'?8 +ngela "cRobbie and Sarah 3' :hornton, BRethining "oral Panic for "ulti-"ediated Social ;orlds,B The )ritish /ournal of Sociolog & MG, no' M (?QQN)'?Q "cRobbie and :hornton, BRethining "oral Panic,B ?QL-QN'


15/24




eaggerated, defused or incited and thus sociall& constructed'20 ndeed, the panic o*er

9ou:ube might best be understood as arising from the fact that people can broadcast their

thoughts regardless of their authorit& in traditional spheres of epertise'

Regardless of the longe*it& of 9ou:ube, %hat loos liel& to continue is an association of

media change %ith &outh culture that should be unpaced rather than reproduced b&

cultural and media studies' 9outh as a trope for accounts of media change allo%s a

positi*e spin (b& implication it is *ibrant and full of potential), an ine*itable spin

(because generations can be neatl& assumed to ha*e different presumed no%ledges of

changing technolog&), and a threatening spin (insofar as it in*oes some ine*itable

redundanc& for %hat is no% and has been)' 9oung people are no% percei*ed as the

dri*ers of this ind of technological change, and this form of agenc& remains suspect to a

nominal parent generation and other figures of authorit& positioned as struggling to eep

step %ith such technologies' Precisel& because of the &outh@parent culture d&namic

ingrained in media representations of &outh and scholarl& discourses on &outh culture,

this produces and interacts %ith a subseuent fiation on inno*ations in sur*eillance'

n turn, users of ne% media continue to be painted alternati*el& as *ictims (pre& to

stalers, pedophiles or *arious forms of manipulati*e misinformation) or the perpetrators

of ungo*ernable beha*iour (such as the porn-obsessed gee, the isolated school&ard iller

%hose "&Space account is no% routinel& mined for s&mptoms of a ps&chotic state, or

riotous or indolent online games addict)' :his same milieu caters to the assumption that

20 Fuipers, B:he Social Construction of igital anger,B L8?'


16/24




&oung people %ho spend all their time on the internet ha*e no life, or that an o*ersuppl&

of technological stimuli is rendering &oung people ill-euipped for this same inherent

good< .real life/' t is finall& crucial to recogniAe that such generationalising discourse is

in no %a& confined to eternal discourses on online culture, and is also produced b& those

that position themsel*es as .&outh/ as %ell as those that do not' :his image of a

generation gap is thus also part of the fabric of online communit& formation, ho%e*er %e

%ant to %eight institutional and public reinforcement of the association or the moral

panic o*er .&outh toda&/ in eplaining that situation'

Private lives and public intimacy

n the %ider media en*ironment, the concern most often and most coherentl& epressed at

the moment regarding &oung people6s use of online technologies seems to be the etent to

%hich social net%oring sites based on personal interestsE"&Space, 7riendster,

7aceboo in the nglish speaing %orldEre*eal aspects of users6 identities that render

them *ulnerable in one %a& or another' ;hile such declarations of personal information

are formulaic features of most successful online portals (including those that the internet

studies literature mentioned pre*iousl& %ould classif& as information@utilit& transactions,

or simpl& .e-commerce/) both media and scholarl& attention has tended to focus on those

percei*ed to be se%ed to%ards a &outh demographic'

mil& $ussbaum6s 2004 article, .Fids, the nternet, and the nd of Pri*ac&/ epitomiAes

such di*isions' +n instance of counter-discourse that clearl& also sustains the moral panic


17/24




about ;eb 2'0, $ussbaum6s s&ndicated feature forcefull& suggested that &oung people6s

%illingness to offer intimate details about themsel*es to a public readership mars .the

greatest generation gap since roc and roll/<

"ore &oung people are putting more personal information out in public than an&

older person e*er %ould and &et the& seem m&steriousl& health& and normal, sa*e

for an entirel& different definition of pri*ac&' 7rom their perspecti*e, it6s the

etreme caution of the earlier generation that6s the narcissistic thing'2?

:he significance of $ussbaum6s account is her s&mpathetic portra&al of users6 agenc&

and rationalit&' uotations enhancing the profiles of those portra&ed turn the table on

commonsense attitudes to%ards &oung people and the internet %idel& circulating in the

mainstream media, painting older generations6 beliefs as the true oddit&<

+t ?4, ppermann is con*ersant %ith the con*entional %isdom about the online

%orld that it6s a setch& bus station paced %ith pedophiles' (n fact, that6s prett&

much the standard response 6*e gotten %hen 6*e spoen about this piece %ith

an&one o*er LQ< .>ut %hat about the per*erts=/ 7or teenagers, %ho ha*e gro%n

up laughing at porn pop-ups and the occasional instant message from a sleeA&

stranger, this is about as logical as the uestion .Do% can &ou mo*e to $e%

9or= 9ou6ll get muggedT/) She argues that %hen it comes to online relationships,

.&ou6re getting %hat &ou6re being'/22

2? mil& $ussbaum, BFids, the nternet, and the nd of Pri*ac&< :he #reatest #eneration #ap since Roc

and Roll,B *ew Yor# Maga0ine, ?2 7ebruar& 2004 2004'22 $ussbaum, BFids, the nternet, and the nd of Pri*ac&'B


18/24




;hile $ussbaum6s article deplo&s and eploits a generationalising description of social

net%oring sites, %e are particularl& interested in its rele*ance to discussions about

control, empo%erment and confidence %ith ne% forms of intimac&' +mong the fe%

scholars to ha*e engaged %ith such de*elopments in a sustained %a&, "ar +ndre1e*ic

%as uic to obser*e this same issue in his stud& of %ebcam culture'2L 3&nn Clar also

suggests that ha*ing control o*er one6s imagebeing able to manipulate the means of

one6s self-presentationcan be an important route to%ards building self-esteem at a

*ulnerable age and can create ne% opportunities for interaction that focus on out%ard

appearance once pre*ented'2M Clar6s anal&sis is also part of the general %a*e of

cautiousness accompan&ing descriptions of the ne% forms of connection enabled b&

online technolog&<

>ecause the focus in the nternet date is on indi*idual gratification, teens

eperience no sense of obligations to the person %ith %hom the& are ephemerall&

committed if a person fails to sho% up at the preappointed time, there are no

conseuences' f course, this assumes that both parties agree to the lac of

seriousness %ith %hich such relations are entered into' enial of a more intimate

connection is not out of maliciousness those %ho belie*e that the& are

eperiencing more than simpl& a .fun,/ ephemeral connection are assumed to be

not .pla&ing b& the rules,/ as it %ere'2N

2L :he shift in attitude he noticed %as that for %eb-cam users, much lie $ussbaum6s informants, perpetual

sur*eillance %as .nothing to be afraid ofso long as %e are honest %ith oursel*es' Comfort %ith self-disclosure signifies a health& openness and self-a%areness' t is no longer sur*eillance that is stigmatiAed,

but the fear of it/ "arc +ndre1e*ic, B:he ;ebcam Subculture and the igital nclosure,B in Medias!ace,

Place1 Scale1 and 'ulture in a Media Ag e, ed' $' Couldr& and +' "cCarth& (3ondon< Routledge, 200M), M?'2M 3&nn Schofield Clar, Bating on the $et< :eens and the Rise f BPureB Relationships,B in 'ybersociety

234, Revisiting 'om!uter-Mediated 'ommunication and 'ommunit &, ed' Ste*en 5ones (:housand as,

C+< Sage, ?QQ8)'2N Clar, Bating on the $et,B ?8?'


19/24




espite appearing at different times and ha*ing different ob1ects of anal&sis, %hat these

arguments share is a recognition that online interaction offers a form of intimac& that

surpasses the le*el of comfort of an earlier timeEi'e', that %ith %hich the author is most

habituated' Concern o*er a lac of pri*ac& furthered b& the broadcast impulse combine in

the anthropologicall& inflected eposVs of apparentl& biAarre &outhful life online<

mainstream media re*elations of ho% people li*e on and through "&Space, 9ou:ube,

instant messaging programs and the lie'

Current commentators seem caught in a c&cle of precaution and septicism o*er the long-

term conseuences of surrendering personal information and pla&ing out significant

relationships through publicl& a*ailable commerciall& o%ned media' n this *ein, blogger

and researcher anah >o&d recentl& mused on the perils of archi*ed romance, seeing

online relationships as a %orr&ing aspect of societ&6s desire to inoculate itself against

forgetting %ith unlimited storage space and a ne*er ending e-archi*e'2G >o&d seems

nostalgic for a time %hen relationships %ere less public, less mediated and hence more

authenticall& .real/, although acno%ledging that mass media products ha*e al%a&s

pro*ided narrati*es b& %hich %e negotiate our most significant relationships'

n fact, such aniet& about the problematic intimac& of online culture is nothing ne%' .n

Sherr& :urle6s (?QQG) phrase, the personal computer is an Wintimate machine6'B24 +nd, as

2G anah >o&d, B:o Remember or to 7orget= n >abies and >eer #oggles,B a!o!henia (2004),

httpell and >arbara "' Fenned&, eds', The 'ybercultures Reader (3ondon< Routledge, 2000), N'


20/24




Sha%n ;ilbur pointed out in ?QQ4, it is unsurprising that .*irtual communit&/ emerged

as .among the most used, and perhaps abused, phrases in the literature on computer-

mediated communication (C"C)/ because .+n increasing number of people are finding

their li*es touched b& collecti*ities %ith ha*e nothing to do %ith ph&sical proimit&/' 28

So %h& is pri*ac& as a right endangered b& the internet emerging no% as a basis for a

moral panic centred, &et again, on &outh= n an academic contet a pre-established

in*estigati*e categor& lie &outh can be attributed, to some degree, to the temporalities of

no%ledge production (stud&ing &oung people in school classrooms or lecture halls is a

con*enient and economical %a& of doing research)' 7or 1ournalism, the apocal&ptic

o*ertones of generationalism is simpl& good cop& and lining this to uestions of pri*ac&

pla&s neatl& into %hat might be separate concerns about the effects of personal

information circulating on the internet' Do%e*er, in 2004, the same discourse %as

in*oed around the release of Radar, a social net%oring pacage that allo%s instant

publishing of photo updates to selected friends< %hat Radar6s promoters call a .7ull-:ime

ntimate Communit&/ (7:C)'

7:Cs are the close group of friends (usuall& around 8-?0 people) %ith %hom &ou

share a clear sense of .presence/' "ost mobile &ouths no% %hether members of

their 7:C are a%ae, at school, happ&, sic, finished %ith their home%or, etc'

:he& use their mobile phones to eep in touch %ith their 7:C, usuall& sending

state changes b& tet message' :he idea behind Radar is to use photos as a

presence stream to &our intimate friends so &ou can share a richer presence and

28 Sha%n P' ;ilbur, B+n +rchaeolog& of C&berspaces< irtualit&, Communit&, dentit&,B in The

'ybercultures Reader, ed' ' >ell ! >' Fenned& (3ondon< Routledge, 2000), MN'


21/24




mae short comments on the stream of images that sho% up in the .channels/

from &our friends'2Q

$oting this de*elopment, bloggers such as 5ill ;aler and her readers %ere alienated b&

the idea that users %ould need to maintain contact %ith a group of friends in uite this

%a&' ntroducing her discussion of Radar b& sa&ing . thin %as born fifteen &ears too

late to ha*e an 7:C (7ull-:ime ntimate Communit&)/, subseuent comments on

;aler6s blog responded to the terms of debate she set up, demonstrating that

generationalism pre*ails in online as %ell as offline contets, amongst academic as much

as popular representations'

+long %ith its immediate precedent in :%itter (and arguabl& the moblogging functions in

7licr), Radar is 1ust the latest attempt at realiAing the potential of netcasting anticipated

in +ndre1e*ic6s %or< .neither the familiar one-to-man& nor the one-to-one model, but

rather a Wman&-to-fe%6 format n other %ords, e*er&one (%ith some minimal le*el of

disposable income) %ill ha*e his or her o%n sho%B'L0 +t present these practices tend to

in*ol*e onl& trusted friends, against +ndre1e*ic6s some%hat d&stopian *ision that

consumers %ill transmit the content of their dail& li*es .to a core group of data miners/

%ho %ill .in turn, sort, pacage, re-sell and e*entuall& use this information/'L? :here ma&

be as much to sa& about the *alue of apparentl& ne% modes of intimac& summed up b&

.7:C/ as there are cautious uestions to be raised' >ut in %hat senses is this sort of

intimac& a mode of &outh culture, and %hat is missed or lost to anal&sis b& using the

2Q 5oi to, BRadar,B /oi +to%s 5e b (2004), http


22/24




generational narrati*e to tal about the cultural shifts that might be in*ol*ed here= ;hile

%ebcams might %ell appeal to the &oung the& certainl& do not appeal onl& to the &oung

Enot as seto&, not as telephone accessor&, and not as sur*eillance de*ice' :he concept

of 7:C is as rele*ant to changed net%ors of personal and professional relationships that

are not generationall& organiAed' :he 7:C, if it can be seen as a dramatic

phenomenological shift, is not dependent on Radar, instant messaging, or an& other

specific technolog&' t can be traced in the emergence of mailing list, " and RC

communities discussed b& ;ilbur, and in the changing inter-generational famil& net%ors

apparent bet%een the lines of "c"illan and "orrison6s anal&sis'

Towards a “sympathetic” online cultural studies

ur critiue of generationalism here addresses not onl& the media and a populist political

public sphere but also the range of academic anal&sis of life online' :he scholarship %e

ha*e been bouncing off and circling around in this chapter de*eloped in response to

categories of con*enience, such as age, often combined %ith gender, race and ethnicit&,

but almost %ithout eception in relation to the e!erience of other !eo!le6 effecti*el&

%riting out an& personal in*ol*ement' f our aim %ere simpl& to de*elop scholarship that

%as more fittingl& reflecti*e of the e*er&da& life of others6 online beha*iour, %e %ould

argue that s&mpathetic accounts of online culture are needed to protect the no*elt& and

the pleasures in*ol*ed in such practices' :he research currentl& being commissioned

seems con*enientl& suited to mareting ne% products, or, as our opening discussion

sho%ed, taes place in a contet defined b& a more thoroughgoing eploitation of .gee


23/24




chic/L2 for the benefit of established media or business conglomerates' 7or instance, %e

no% see brands lie Cal*in Flein pitching ne% fragrance, .in2u/, to the lifest&le assumed

of toda&6s .technoseual/ &outh'LL Coinciding %ith Son& ricsson6s campaign for its

;alman phone, in %hich a &oung urban heteroseual couple celebrate their anni*ersar&

listening to their fa*orite song through shared headphones, these understandings of online

culture onl& seem desirable to the etent that the& can pinpoint a plausible target maret

and reinscribe established modes of eperiencing intimac& and communit&' nternet

research needs to set its sights further than demographics useful to the net ad campaign,

and online culture might teach us more about the future possibilities for friendship,

solidarit& and care than a*ailable debates %ould suggest'

t is surel& possible to adopt a mode of criticismEa form of engagementEthat allo%s for

participation in online culture as part of a self-reflei*e process considering critical

.habits/ of age or disciplinar& training'LM n The Pirate"s .ianc7e, "eaghan "orris

described .s&mpathetic reading/ as a %a& of resisting the automatic reflees of

intellectual bias, arguing that in their singularit&, cultural tets can act as criticisms of

those ans%ers that political preferences or disciplinar& bliners .might automaticall&

pro*ide/'LN "orris6s notion of a .s&mpathetic reading/ could produce discrete accounts of

ne% media use that a*oid an insider@outsider binar& %hile interrogating the alleged

L2 Son&6s %ebsite features a .7un and #ames/ section %here subscribers can do%nload images of .:he#ees/ cartoon characters as %allpaper for mobile phones'LL :he press release for the scent included the line - .She lies ho% he blogs, her tets turn him on' t6s

intense' 7or right no%/' Unsurprisingl&, blog reactions %ere scathing in their response to such

commodification'LM "elissa #regg, B7eeling rdinar&< >logging as Con*ersational Scholarship,B 'ontinuum, /ournal of

Media ( 'ultural Studies 20, no' 2 (200G)'LN "eaghan "orris, The Pirate%s .iancee, .eminism Reading Postmodernism (3ondon< erso, ?Q88), G'


24/24




distinctions bet%een real@*irtual and online@offline, helping to recognise online culture as

an ordinar& part of e*er&da& life' ;e are therefore ad*ocating .s&mpathetic/ online

cultural studies as a pro*isional means b& %hich internet studies can reflect on the %ider

changes taing place in information economies and cultures that a focus on &outh and

demographics %ill onl& e*er mas' t is one small %a& that con*entional modes of

scholarl& detachment and appraisal ma& better contribute to the challenges emerging in

an al%a&s-on, information rich, highl& net%ored societ&< for &oung and old alie'

Broadcast Yourself Final

Documents

Transcript of Broadcast Yourself Final