Entrenching New Mechanisms of Control

Though new media and participatory culture are undoubtedly creating a radical change in the media and communication systems, the result may not necessarily be a more democratic media. Indeed, it has also been suggested that new mechanisms of control in the public sphere may also be established with the rise of participatory culture. This control is reflected in two disproportionate forms – control by the consumer, but more widely held is control of the consumer.

The foremost means of control by the consumer, embedded by participatory culture, is control over the media that they engage with. In line with previous discussions regarding how blogs allow alternative perspectives of news events and social issues to enter the public sphere, the concept of ‘narrowcasting’ emerges. Narrowcast media transmission “caters for small groups of people” (O’Shaughnessy and Stadler, 2002: 432) and as Jenkins describes, it specifically involves this “alternative sphere of popular culture” (2004: 38). Furthermore, the popularity and explosion in the number of blogs, illustrates what Jenkins identifies as “a push…towards greater narrowcasting” (Jenkins, 2004: 38). It is “in this context, consumers are expected to play a much more active role in determining what content is appropriate” (Jenkins, 2004: 38). The growing power of consumers to ‘filter’ what they see can be described as a “process of personalization” (Sunstein, 2004: 58). While some such as Rebecca Blood (2000: 2) describe this as “a valuable filtering function” for consumers, it is essential to also note that “limiting their exposure to topics and points of view of their own choosing” poses some danger to the democratic element of new media, previously considered (Sunstein, 2004: 58). Liberal political supporters may choose to “isolate themselves” in Josh Marshall’s political blog for example, and “speak only with like-minded others” (Sunstein, 2004: 58). Such perfect individual control over content however, “can reduce the importance of the ‘public sphere’” (Sunstein, 2004: 58). This is in view of the fact that the public sphere refers to a space “where ideas and feelings relevant to politics are transmitted or exchanged openly,” regardless of whether they have explicitly chosen the encounter (Bennett and Entman, 2001: 3). Thus, it is clear that participatory culture, as evidenced by blogs, offers a new mechanism of control for consumers to control what information they engage with. The reality that this may create serious dangers to democracy however, must also be considered.

A more widespread form of control entrenched by participatory culture, exists as control of the consumer. This is frequently demonstrated in the blogosphere, through the use of moderating techniques, such as administrators, moderators and the presence of rules. In such cases, there is a degree of regulation as to who can access posts or forums. Specifically, and as defined by ‘Blogspot’, administrators and/or moderators “have the ability to edit and delete posts”, as well as “add or remove other” users who disobey the site rules. Similar control is provided by the use of an editorial hierarchy, as exemplified by Talking Points Memo. In this case, the hierarchy includes an editor and publisher (Marshall), deputy editor, associate editors, reporter-bloggers and research interns. The hierarchy again acts as a degree of regulation. As editorial forces between the consumer and publishing consumer content, both the presence of a hierarchy and use of moderating techniques, reflect an additional barrier to entry to the public sphere. Hence, a new mechanism of control over the consumer is entrenched by participatory culture.

A growing number of critiques of the democratic possibilities of participatory culture and the Internet, focus on the commercialisation of cyberspace. In terms of blogs, this refers to how the blogosphere is being reincorporated into traditional media models. The way in which blogging has become an arm of multi-platform corporate strategies, will thus be explored. This primarily applies to the acquisition of blogging services by other traditional media companies, and reflects the transformation to a more “centralised and recorporatised” cyberspace (Cover, 2004: 184). Such a transformation “significantly undercut(s) the web’s prevailing gift economy,” and in the case of blogs, it questions the open source characteristic upon which the blogosphere is built (Jenkins, 2004: 39). For example; Google bought blogger.com in 2003, Windows have developed the hugely popular MSN Spaces (Windows Live Space), Yahoo Inc. created 360°, and Fox Interactive (News Corporation) famously bought Myspace for $580 million in 2005 (BBC News, 2005: 1). These blogging tools and servers are effectively traded as commodities that become owned by corporate shareholders.

As the corporate media regain their considerable influence and control over the public sphere, important implications for consumers arise – namely, users are vulnerable to exploitation and restricted rights as the profit maximizing aim of corporate owners is realised. This idea is highlighted through the efforts of musician Billy Bragg. In 2006, Bragg successfully lobbied News Corporation’s MySpace to change its terms and conditions to clarify the rights granted to musicians who post files on its website. Bragg followed on later, to challenge the founders of Bebo over similar claims. In fact, The Guardian newspaper reported that “before Bragg’s intervention, Bebo’s proprietary rights clause claimed perpetual and irrevocable rights in all content appearing on the site” (Day, 2006: 2). As Bragg stressed, this meant that even if material had been removed from the site, Bebo would still retain rights in it (Day, 2006: 2). While these significant events in the blogosphere prove that consumer’s may still exercise the right to challenge corporate owners, it also reveals the vulnerability of users to hidden terms and conditions employed by site owners. Bragg demonstrated this yet again, with his most recent corporate challenge of 'MTV Flux' and it's terms of use. The possibility that users may unknowingly be exploited, presents a new means of control to corporations as owners of these participatory platforms, in such a dominant position.