ARTS2090 Distribution project
Q3: When publishing changes, so does society. Investigate and compare the impact of two publication technologies (one pre-1800 and one post-1962) on social-relationships.
As the development of media and publishing continues to evolve rapidly over time, it also continues to unravel significant impacts such as societal lifestyles and new forms of communication. Since the introduction of newspapers in the pre-1900s, social relationships amongst individuals and their involvement with media have transformed significantly, as this is especially manifested when we make comparisons with Twitter, one of the most popular social media and micro-blogging networks in contemporary society.
Before this period, newspapers were one of the many expressions of popular culture that played a crucial role in influencing the American society as newspapers occupied an ancillary position in the formation of public opinion during the late 18th Century and early 19th Century. After 1900, newspapers then transformed into primary determinants of public opinion, and became the arbiters and generators of American popular culture (Croteau; Hoynes, 2003).
Until the late 1800s, US newspapers had been largely funded and controlled by political parties, politicians and partisan organizations. The earliest works on the frontier press were produced by Romantic historians, and the individuals behind these presses were regarded as the ‘rugged, colourful and bold individualists’ who produced major contributions to the progress of American civilisation (Croteau; Hoynes, 2003).
Between 1750 and 1820, American underwent a series of extensive political upheavals in which the press played a pivotal role. After 8 yrs of revolution and Britain allowing the US to develop its unique government system, Americans transformed their country from a loosely organised confederation of states into a nation with a strong central government and a powerful constitution (Sloan, 1991). During these developments, the fast-growing newspaper industry acted as both witness to events – and – as an active participant in the political process. It was evident that the press played a crucial role in shaping this political world, as the voice of the public opinion became more dominant within America’s public domain (Sloan, 1991).
Judge Alexander Addison even warned America of the press’s significant influential status (1799): ‘…give any set of men the command of the press, and you give them the command of the country, for you give them the command of public opinion, which commands everything.’ It is evident that as this communal voice grew stronger, the government feared rebellion and conspiracy. This resulted in many attempts to ‘silence newspapers’ as those who wrote, uttered, printed, or published any false, scandalous, or malicious comments’ against the government was to be punished by fine and imprisonment (Sloan, 1991). Therefore, it clearly manifests how social relationships operated back then. The 19thCentury American society once followed a hierarchical structure as the government and political parties’ presses were once seen at the peak – whom had the power to collect; produce; and distribute information and using it to influence and control society – which ultimately succumbed when the individuals’ voice of the public began to rise and dominating the press.
Since the induction of the Internet in the late 20th Century, it introduced an age of digital-information publishing and social media that has dramatically evolved the print media industry. Some of these contemporary forms of communication and publishing includes blogging, vlogging, Facebook, MySpace, e-books etc. So what exactly are the differences, and societal impacts between centuries’ worth of media and publishing?
Similarly to the public/ individual voices in the 19th Century, there was once a time when any ambitious individual could become a media publisher in today’s society. For the print media industry, the only requirements needed was a several million dollars; a team of editors and writers; a printing press capable of printing out a dozen copies per second, and a distribution network that would not distribute your publication to numerous stores across the country.
However, the final result depended on the content that was produced by the media producer. With print media in particular, social relationships were difficult to establish and to maintain, as it demanded media publishers to not only be engaging and resourceful, but to also connect; communicate and interact with its readers/viewers in some practical way. For instance, the only form of communication that the newspapers (and/or media-newspaper ‘publishers’) had with its readers/viewers was the fact that readers were being talked to by the writers and editors. If readers liked what they read, they would keep tuning in and the company, in return, would make money and gain readership. If readers/viewers did not like it, we would stop buying/following the person.
As technology develops, media has also transformed extensively, affecting individuals’ lifestyle; means of communication; and social relationships. Twitter, for instance, embraces and converges traditional media, and then adapts to the new digital age with new conventions of social media and web 2.0. Since Twitter’s inception in 2006, Twitter’s growth has been phenomenal, with its notability and popularity quickly rising over the years. By Oct 2008, TwitDir (a directory of Twitter users) reported that it knew 3,262,795 twitterers (Comm, 2009). By the end of 2009, there are now more than 100 million users on Twitter (Wikipedia, 2010), with around 200,000 active twitterers believed to be sending more than 4 million messages on a daily basis (Sysomos, 2010).
Although Twitter is often underestimated for its simplicity and the misperception of being similar to instant-messenging and SMS service (but on the Internet), it has, however, proven itself to be very useful in many ways.
Evan Williams argues that Twitter is ‘not just a social network, but an information network’ as individuals have the power to deliver ‘the best and freshest most relevant information possible’ (O’Riley Media, 2009). When you jump on the Twitter-bandwagon, you are welcomed by the tweet-status box: “What are you doing now? // What’s happening now?” Depending on your privacy and distribution settings, your tweet will be sent to the open-accessible unknown domain.
As many users choose to have it available on open-access, the concept manifested behind “What’s happening now?” enables any individual to become their own media publisher (in other words, a prod-user), without having any fuss, license or proper expertise in the field, unlike traditional print media. According to ‘Pear Analytics’, a San-Antonio-based market research firm, it analysed over 2,000 tweets (in the US) over a two-week period in August 2009, and categorised tweets in the following six categories (Kelly; Ryan, 2006):
- Pointless babble – 41%
- Conversational – 38%
- Pass-along value – 9%
- Self-promotion – 6%
- Spam – 4%
- News – 4%
Social networking researcher, Danah Boyd, however, argued that the first category ‘pointless babble’ is better characterized as ‘peripheral awareness’ or ‘social grooming’ (Boyd, 2009). Based on the statistics, it is obvious that individuals are compelled to ‘tweet’ as there is the notion that individuals would (and should) contribute information, even the most tiniest piece of information which perfectly supports William’s concept of Twitter being ‘an information network’. For instance, if you follow 20 people, you’ll not be surprised to see a mixture of tweets scrolling down your page such as breakfast-cereal updates, interesting new links, music recommendations, and even musings on the future of education. Unlike newspapers, a notable difference that rises from this change in communication is that instead of just sending an email or texting your friends of what you’re up to, you c
an do it via Twitter where your messages will reach to those who actually care, and would want to read.
As Twitter is embedded in other forms of multiplatform technologies such as phones, Twitter’s conveniently accessible and portable 24/7, and users will be able to distribute information (text, pics, vids and links) instantly (unlike print media). This was seen with the 2009 Hudson River incident (Jan 2009) as a passenger on one of the ferries, Janis Krums, immediately rushed to help whilst taking a photo and tweeted it (using Twitpic) before any other media arrived at the scene (Cellan-Jones; Rory). As a result, the world has recognised Twitter of how it changes the way how we create; use; and distribute content’ (Comm; Robbins; Buge, 2009), enabling individuals to easily become their own media publisher and sharing information with the world on the same common level.
Unlike Facebook or MySpace which revolves around the notion of networks and interpersonal relations, the most distinguishable aspects of Twitter is that such social relationships doesn’t matter. It doesn’t matter who your followers are; how many followers you have on your list or how loyal your followers are – and most importantly of all, it doesn’t matter whether you’re personally acquainted with them, or whether you know/met them. Everyone considers Twitter as a vibrant place to find news and conversations; to find and socialize with individuals whom have similar interests; and it can also be used as a valuable resource tool.
For instance, think Twitter as a massive group of friends with a diversity of knowledge –from the best restaurants in a specific city – to finding the best fashion brands – to recommendations for a certain type of movie – you can tweet this in 140 words to the Twitter-sphere, and there’ll always be someone who have an answer for you. In other words, there is a huge database at your fingertips that you can utilize almost instantly. The value of Twitter as a resource tool should not be under-estimated, as Twitter, in many ways, has the ability to provide answers just like Google or Wikipedia.
According to a 2009 Sysomos Inc. research, Sysomos was determined to identify sets of Twitter users that are tightly ‘connected’ in terms of following each other. To their surprise, the results were ‘astonishing’ as they discovered that there were communities for almost every topic on Twitter, and some of these communities were mainly divided between categories such as music, children’s books, new parents, lawyers, state politics and city events etc (Sysomos, 2009). They discovered that the denser the community, the more specific the topics of interest.
For instance, if we look at the Twilight fandom, Twilighters have generally created lots of ‘communities’ that they have an interest in. For instance, ‘Robsten’, ‘Taysten’, ‘TeamJacob’, ‘TeamEdward’, ‘WeLoveKstew’, ‘KStewDefenders’ and ‘twibbon’ etc. If we search for that particular community on Twitter, it will display lists of tweets/retweets that are shared amongst them. This ultimately demonstrates how communities and its individuals are united and intimately intertwined on Twitter. As Twitter’s nature is open-accessible, it enables everyone to see what others are saying/doing/updating (with relevance to their interests), allowing everyone to become friends; and interact and discuss with one another.
This concept of uniting individuals/communities, and the interaction of sharing and conversing messages over Twitter has also been introduced in education throughout the world. For example, Twitter was incorporated into the actual classroom setting of History courses with big groups of students at the University of Texas at Dallas (see References). They discovered that several advantages of using Twitter (in class) includes giving students the opportunity to express their views freely in class; developing students’ knowledge and skills of using media and technology; and also forcing students to get to the central point when having discussions with other students (due to the word limit of 140 words).
Another example would be the exponential growth of well-known people such as Barack Obama, Oprah and Ashton Kutcher (etc) on Twitter. Their use of Twitter not only gives them exposure and promotes their image and personalities, but it also reduces the interpersonal distance between ‘them’ and ‘us’ even closer, as Twitter humanises themselves as ‘ordinary’ just like their followers. Twitter not only enables them to inform their followers of the events that’s occurring in their lives, but it also allows both sides to form ‘bonds’; interact and socialise with one another.
Therefore, it is evident how the nature of societies differ in many ways when we make comparisons between two types of media technologies (newspapers and Twitter) from two different contexts. However, it not only highlights societal differences, but it also illustrates the differing impacts of changing publishing technologies on social relationships amongst individuals of society. With newspapers in the pre-1900s, society was controlled by a hierachical process, which then slowly succumbed to the communal voice. Unlike Twitter in the 21st Century, any individual can become their own media publisher and as a result, individuals are united by all sorts of information, allowing people to form intimate and active relationships. Therefore, it can be seen how changes in publishing has ultimately, and significantly changed not only societies themselves– but also social relationships, and the way society creates and distribute information.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
REFERENCES
Croteau, D. and Hoynes, W 92003) Media Society: Industries, Images and Audiences (3rd Ed) Pine Forge Press, Thousand Oaks
Sloan, W., 1991,Perspectives on Mass Communication History, Routledge (June 1, 1991)
Twitter snags over 100 million users, eyes money-making”. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/infotech/internet/Twitter-snags-over-100-million-users-eyes-money-making/articleshow/5808927.cms. Retrieved April 15, 2010.
Kelly, Ryan, ed (August 12, 2009). “Twitter Study – August 2009” (PDF). Twitter Study Reveals Interesting Results About Usage. San Antonio, Texas: Pear Analytics. http://www.pearanalytics.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/Twitter-Study-August-2009.pdf. Retrieved Jun 3, 2010
Danah Boyd (August 16, 2009). “Twitter: “pointless babble” or peripheral awareness + social grooming?”. http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2009/08/16/twitter_pointle.html. Retrieved September 19, 2009
Cellan-Jones, Rory (January 16, 2009). “Twitter and a classic picture”. BBC. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/technology/2009/01/twitter_and_a_classic_picture.html. Retrieved June 7, 2009.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Barber, P., “A Brief History of Newspapers” , Historic Newspapers and Early Imprints. 2002. http://www.historicpages.com/
Martin, S., Copeland, D. ,2003, The function of newspapers in society: a global perspective, Praeger (June 30, 2003)
Pictures
Daniel R., 2007, LA Times, http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:A_stack_of_newspapers.jpg
Susan Ma's Online Portfolio 
Discussion
No comments yet.