Digital Media & Culture: Collaborative Essay Collection 2018/Always-on Culture/Research Question 4: Team Szucs

=Type your research question here once agreed with lecturer=

Introduction
Andrew Keen’s statement illustrates the depth of the internet age and the elements of information overload as he states, “anyone with internet can publish anything online.” That in turn contributes to the ‘always on culture,’ as due to the rise in social media platforms people have the ability to limitlessly voice their opinion online, through these sites, or by publishing and creating their own websites. Thus, this essay will discuss the positive and negative attributes of the always on culture in relation to Keen’s statement such as the societal effects; from how we communicate online and off, the reality of constantly being surveyed, Shirky’s fame Vs fortune and free content especially in relation to Keen’s stance on Youtube, blogspace and Wikipedia. Additionally, the economic factors of the always on culture and how the ownership of multiple devices has contributed to an era of the tethered self. Also, how this has created different working environments and how we operate businesses in society. Altogether these topics will then be addressed comparatively with how the always on culture has adapted historically. Throughout each subject being critically discussed regarding Keen’s quotation.

Main Concepts
2524419

Regarding the always on culture the internet has indeed changed society through the way we communicate, “always on and (now) always with us, we tend the net, and the net teaches us to need it.” (Turkle, 2011) Most of our communicating occurs online conversations we would have saved for in person now instead we engage with others through screens, “part of your life is lived in virtual places.” (Turkle, 2011) The always on culture is dependent on people choosing to communicate online rather than face to face. Though this has made our society more technologically advanced it too has dented our social skills. Along with blurring the lines of reality. People can appear differently online as the “ego monster” (Baron, 2008) takes over well as differentiation in way they conduct themselves as most people are more confident “. Such as messaging someone first is easier online, the rejection is easier to handle than in person. (Baron, 2008) Additionally, people are far meaner behind the screen and bullying is far more predominant from ‘keyboard gangsters.’ Consequently, this has resulted in having an online persona and our real-world selves.

In relation to communicating screen to screen always being on this relates to constant surveillance and monitoring through CCTV, data collecting, web cam hacking and security cameras in operation within our society. The big brother system of always being watched proposes the question are we ever offline? “I may not be always on the internet as we think of it colloquially, but I am always connected to the network.” (Boyd, 2012) Even if we are logged out or indeed have no online presence we are still being recorded or watched by someone. Anyone can record anyone, we feature in the background of hundreds of people’s videos and pictures, therefore, it’s difficult to become untraceable. Especially within our culture, the need to document has become ever more prevalent. Thus, the popularity in blogs and Youtubers. Through the support of the always on audience- there is always someone viewing. However, although this may add the notion of information overload and “mob chaos,” arguably the large quantity of noise, though difficult to wade through and is indeed overwhelming but the volume is in response to the unethical way we are surveyed. As our freedom to creative comes at a cost of being monitored surely, we should make sure each voice is taking their turn to speak. Therefore, it is necessary for ‘traditional gate keepers to lose their power,’ as no one group should own all of the media, it is better to have a thousand voices than one. This in turn supports the always on culture as people are actively reachable with a platform to voice their opinion.

To an extent it is agreeable as Keen states, “nobody can legitimately determine aesthetic standard or truths.” Especially in recent times the evolution of ‘fake news’ has made it increasingly difficult to establish the truth however the reason fake news is successful is due to the overload of information and its consistent turnover. Although its constant turnover uses the always on culture as an apparatus, as without people always being online there would be no audience and no one demanding updates. Essentially this is why big news stories never last more than two weeks in the headlines. In turn fake news goes hand in hand with always on culture, as the result of people globally people always being online means users buying into fake content because everything moves so quickly. Amidst trying to keep up to date people fall into a trap of fake news. Especially in an attempt to be the first to share with friends,’ information is misconstrued because it’s done so quickly. Consequently, this agrees with Keen’s statement “Today’s internet, quite literally turns the mass media on its head.” As before the internet age we only had a small number of media outlets who had all control. However, the always on culture and the internet itself has changed this structure. Arguably this would give us more of a democratic view of information. However Keen argues this is “de-Hierachisation” and that it is questionable whether everyone has a valid opinion. Thus, consequently we have to wade through multiple voices many of which are unreliable. However, perhaps it is far more just to have many voices who are able to discuss freely than a small number who control the masses. Evidently the always on culture would never allow for the media to take away our platforms.

2515412

Additionally, Technology has influenced and developed the economy in positive and negative ways. It has pushed the economy to new highs and has allowed for an exponential growth in media and communication. Increasing profit and infrastructure for major cities has brought higher living standards and better global connection. The current generations have grown up using technology and have become dependent on it. With the development of technology came the development of the internet and the creation of an always on culture.

Andrew Keen has a very determined point of view towards the internet and the consequences that follow for any artists and anyone who relies on the physical economy. He said that the digital revolution “fatally undermines the value of the copy” and that “Today`s internet, quite literally, turns the mass media age on its head” (The Guardian interview with Andrew Keen). Keen argues that the increase in digital media has taken physical economy and turned it into a digital culture, where being online has become a norm. This always on culture has free access to the internet and the allowance to post and create any information they like. The free access diminishes the quality of work presented online and creating a platform that is a “dumbing down of culture” (The Guardian interview with Andrew Keen). As examples he used YouTube and Wikipedia which are both user content based. He argues that the information posted by “anyone” will undermine authority and experts from providing information that is accurate. Furthermore, Keen believes that digitalization has decreased the value of the physical economic market. The constant access to the internet allows for books, CDs and newspapers to be viewed online or downloaded illegally. Record labels have had a 20% (The Guardian interview with Andrew Keen) decrease in sales due to the digitalization of music. Moreover, an always on culture also brings digital devices and modern technology for personal and industrial usage. The industrial technology has had an exponential increase and has made many jobs redundant. This affects the economy by having a higher unemployment rate. Yet this digitalization has also caused higher efficiency in production advertisement and has created world-wide communication.

In contrary to Andrew Keens statement digitalization and always on cultures have become significantly bigger and have reached a point where they are necessary for the economy to function at its full potential. Businesses worldwide communicate amongst each other via the internet. Sherry Turkle wrote in her book Alone Together “the global reach of connectivity can make the most isolated outpost into a centre of learning and economic activity” (pg.152 Together Alone). The internet has brought the world together and formed networks that created the fundamentals of many new companies. One of these companies was presented by Clay Shirky at his Ted talk. Ushahidi is a platform that was created to provide crisis mapping (Clay Shirky: How cognitive surplus will change the world). It became an open source for anyone to post where there was crisis in that country. This idea was then further used around the world like in Haiti after the major earthquake. Clay Shirky sees digitalization as a positive thing. His perspective is that the consumer becomes the producer. It creates content for further consumers rather than just consuming information. These web platforms can only function when consumers become producers. With this it helped many people survive and be aware of danger zones. Furthermore, the large network helped many towns and smaller settlements to find a place on the global map of technology. This resulted in an increase in the size of the platforms. The more information is provided the more accurate the depiction is on the crisis map.

Emily Bell argues that the development of the internet has allowed for more equality and for anyone to have the opportunity to reach success. If this is through an avatar or by reaching a target audience that provides support, it is all possible due to the internet’s connectivity. The physical economy may have decreased; however the digital world has enabled worldwide access to every individual. The digitalization has brought the guardian 15 million monthly readers, which is a goal that could not be achieved solely through the physical economy (The Guardian interview with Andrew Keen). Then again being connected and being part of an always on culture can take its toll on the psyche of the users. Dr Christine Grant, an occupational psychologist at Coventry University's Centre for Research in Psychology in behaviour and achievement said that “the negative impacts of this 'always on' culture are that your mind is never resting, you're not giving your body time to recover, so you're always stressed” (Smartphone stress: Are you a victim of 'always on' culture? Matthew Wall). She continued saying that the more tired we get the less concentrated we are, which can cause accidents and mental health issues. Companies require from their workers to be always on to check and answer email instantly, to be present for any meetings and to always be available. Dr Alasdair Emslie, president of the Society of Occupational Medicine said, "Changes in technology are one contributory factor … employees feel they are unable to cope with increased demands"(Smartphone stress: Are you a victim of 'always on' culture? Matthew Wall).

2417062

The adjustment to today’s technology is a constant change for generations. One of the quickest advances in our world and the most prominent in our day to day lives. The constant streaming, blogging and uploading is not only for a person’s own viewing pleasure but for other’s also. Through history, civilisation has had to adapt its use of technology as it takes over how we interact through life. As Andrew Keen refers to it as the “mass media age”, today’s generation has evolved out of this creator and consumer hierarchy. Keen admits that the old media age has its disadvantages for aspiring artists yet still believes this is better; as now society only produces an amateur/ dumbed down collection of work. (Keen, A.: 2007)

Through generations, human kind have evolved to depend on the internet and media devices. From only using portable radios throughout the 1920s to 1940s; which a study found only 10% of Americans owned, to 2018 where radio can be found in every car, phone and MP3 player around the world (Cohen, Mary M.: 2016). This ‘always on’ culture changes society’s rules of engagement with the world. Parents feel trapped when telling their children how often they can use their phones; they do not want the phone to be used at all times, yet, become scared when they get no response from a text or call (Turkle, S.: 2011;173). Family’s feel grateful to be tethered, allowing all memories and communications to be cherished and shared with just a single tap (Turkle, S.:2011;153). Due to this inability to separate from media, children may struggle to learn feelings of empathy, identity, values and expression (Turkle, S.: 2011;172). He worries that humanity’s need for the internet will surpass the joy of hard held copies; such as books, CDs and records. He even admits himself, rather hypocritically, to needing web browsers and sites such as Google to market and promote his own book, which references the use of media today. Andrew Keen’s argument stems from this lack of expression and separation. Through this, everyone leans on media to understand the world; meaning “everybody, or nobody” can determine what fulfils the generation’s standards and aesthetics as Andrew Keen states (2007).

Emily Bell argues back however, stating that the internet and today’s media actually levels the playing field, for artists especially. She also adds that this new platform creates an opportunity for more inspirational material for all generations and for no extra cost (2007). Desire to experiment between children and adults has never been so high and with this platform, people are challenged to up their game for the judging masses; an extra driving obsession Bell states (2007). This ability to express oneself allows for parents and children to feel more secure; offering new possibilities of expressing identity (Turkle, S.: 2011;152). Real life can sometimes make people feel more isolated in forms of social acceptance, whereas the added anonymity that media, and the online world have, can be the reason for its popularity as well as its concern. Internet and the quick sharing of thoughts through media was originally developed to discuss research papers however in the mid-1990s it soared into a source of gossip and chance at a new social world (Turkle, S.: 2011;158). The disappearance of older technologies and sources of information or materials; such as old jobs like mining and agriculture, is only part of why media today is the world’s hot topic. This new place to transform and express allows users an escape into a self they would rather be allowing for more freedom of innovative ideas; not a cultural inequality like Andrew Keen suggests (2007). (Turkle, S.: 2011;158).

To summarize, Andrew Keen makes valid points in relation to social, economic and historic aspects of media and its development. Internet and media has taken over most interactions in today’s world. The media allows a barrier to separate the user from the rest of the globe, giving them a comfortable space to be who they choose. Mary Cohen refers to three themes in her article; personal, preferred and extended consumption (Cohen, Mary M.:2016). These themes refine the understanding of media today; together they create a ‘home away from home’ effect. Andrew Keen conveys his opinions of hierarchy and gatekeepers as key to maintaining the balance between our current society and becoming permanently attached to our media devices. Although his argument holds much merit, Emily Bell’s points seem more forward thinking. For social aspects she argues despite the loss of hierarchy, there is more inspirational material available to make users up their game so that their contributions are deemed as more worthwhile to the masses. Economic society will have more contributing artists rather than cultural gatekeepers who she states were driven by share holders and private equity firms. Through past, present and future, this will allow adults and children to express themselves and their interests freely (2007). Always on culture will permanently have people on both standpoints in this argument. Keen and Bell is just one discussion of many taking place on media around the world. Whatever field of study, work or play pursued would contain always on culture; as a race we cannot survive without it. No side will ever be truly correct at any point in the near future, however with the fast-growing rate, always on culture will be a debate that will have continually new points to consider.