Localizing the Internet beyond Communities and Networks: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Essay: Localizing the internet beyond communities and networks. John Postill. New Media & Society, Vol. 10, No. 3, 413-431 (2008)''' | '''Essay: Localizing the internet beyond communities and networks. John Postill. New Media & Society, Vol. 10, No. 3, 413-431 (2008)''' | ||
| Line 20: | Line 19: | ||
"As the numbers of internet users worldwide continue to grow, the internet is becoming `more local'. This article addresses the epistemological challenge posed by this global process of internet localization by examining some of the conceptual tools at the disposal of internet researchers. It argues that progress has been hampered by an overdependence on the problematic notions of community and network whose paradigmatic status has yet to be questioned by internet scholars. The article seeks to broaden the conceptual space of internet localization studies through a ground-up conceptualization exercise that draws inspiration from the field theories of both Pierre Bourdieu and the Manchester School of Anthropology, and is based on recent fieldwork in suburban Malaysia. This exploration demonstrates that a more nuanced understanding of the plural forms that residential sociality can take is needed in order to move beyond existing binaries such as `network sociality' versus `community sociality'." | "As the numbers of internet users worldwide continue to grow, the internet is becoming `more local'. This article addresses the epistemological challenge posed by this global process of internet localization by examining some of the conceptual tools at the disposal of internet researchers. It argues that progress has been hampered by an overdependence on the problematic notions of community and network whose paradigmatic status has yet to be questioned by internet scholars. The article seeks to broaden the conceptual space of internet localization studies through a ground-up conceptualization exercise that draws inspiration from the field theories of both Pierre Bourdieu and the Manchester School of Anthropology, and is based on recent fieldwork in suburban Malaysia. This exploration demonstrates that a more nuanced understanding of the plural forms that residential sociality can take is needed in order to move beyond existing binaries such as `network sociality' versus `community sociality'." | ||
(http://johnpostill.co.uk/articles/postill_localising_net.pdf) | (http://johnpostill.co.uk/articles/postill_localising_net.pdf) | ||
On the alternative concept of "Social Field": | |||
"In view of these difficulties with public sphere, I wish to propose instead the concept | |||
of ‘social field’ as one possible way of overcoming the community/network impasse3. | |||
Put simply, a social field is a domain of practice in which social agents compete and | |||
cooperate over the same public rewards and prizes (Martin 2003). One advantage of | |||
field is that it is a neutral, technical term lacking the normative idealism of both public | |||
sphere and community. Field theorists have developed a sophisticated vocabulary that | |||
is increasingly being recruited to the study of media (Benson 2007, Benson and | |||
Neveu 2005, Couldry 2007, Hesmondhalgh 2006, Peterson 2003). More pertinent to | |||
the case at hand, field theory offers us a framework with which to analyse the | |||
Internet-mediated relations between local authorities and residents by treating these | |||
two parties not as discrete entities but rather relationally, as two sectors of a porous, | |||
conflict-prone ‘field of residential affairs’ (see Epstein 1958, Venkatesh 2003)." | |||
Revision as of 11:41, 20 January 2009
Essay: Localizing the internet beyond communities and networks. John Postill. New Media & Society, Vol. 10, No. 3, 413-431 (2008)
How can we conceptualise the relationship between technological and social change at the local level? More specifically, what conceptual tools have we got at our disposal to study the emergence of new Internet-related forms of local sociality?
URL = http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/3/413
Draft for download at http://johnpostill.co.uk/articles/postill_localising_net.pdf
Abstract
"As the numbers of internet users worldwide continue to grow, the internet is becoming `more local'. This article addresses the epistemological challenge posed by this global process of internet localization by examining some of the conceptual tools at the disposal of internet researchers. It argues that progress has been hampered by an overdependence on the problematic notions of community and network whose paradigmatic status has yet to be questioned by internet scholars. The article seeks to broaden the conceptual space of internet localization studies through a ground-up conceptualization exercise that draws inspiration from the field theories of both Pierre Bourdieu and the Manchester School of Anthropology, and is based on recent fieldwork in suburban Malaysia. This exploration demonstrates that a more nuanced understanding of the plural forms that residential sociality can take is needed in order to move beyond existing binaries such as `network sociality' versus `community sociality'." (http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/10/3/413)
Excerpts
John Postill:
"As the numbers of internet users worldwide continue to grow, the internet is becoming `more local'. This article addresses the epistemological challenge posed by this global process of internet localization by examining some of the conceptual tools at the disposal of internet researchers. It argues that progress has been hampered by an overdependence on the problematic notions of community and network whose paradigmatic status has yet to be questioned by internet scholars. The article seeks to broaden the conceptual space of internet localization studies through a ground-up conceptualization exercise that draws inspiration from the field theories of both Pierre Bourdieu and the Manchester School of Anthropology, and is based on recent fieldwork in suburban Malaysia. This exploration demonstrates that a more nuanced understanding of the plural forms that residential sociality can take is needed in order to move beyond existing binaries such as `network sociality' versus `community sociality'." (http://johnpostill.co.uk/articles/postill_localising_net.pdf)
On the alternative concept of "Social Field":
"In view of these difficulties with public sphere, I wish to propose instead the concept of ‘social field’ as one possible way of overcoming the community/network impasse3. Put simply, a social field is a domain of practice in which social agents compete and cooperate over the same public rewards and prizes (Martin 2003). One advantage of field is that it is a neutral, technical term lacking the normative idealism of both public sphere and community. Field theorists have developed a sophisticated vocabulary that is increasingly being recruited to the study of media (Benson 2007, Benson and Neveu 2005, Couldry 2007, Hesmondhalgh 2006, Peterson 2003). More pertinent to the case at hand, field theory offers us a framework with which to analyse the Internet-mediated relations between local authorities and residents by treating these two parties not as discrete entities but rather relationally, as two sectors of a porous, conflict-prone ‘field of residential affairs’ (see Epstein 1958, Venkatesh 2003)."