"The development of new/digital media means the audience is more powerful in terms of consumption and production."

The development of new/digital media means the audience is more powerful in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against this view.

The development of new/digital media has impacted the news and audiences of the news, in a number of ways; the internet is considered to be "the most important medium of the twentieth century" (Briggs and Burke); the most effective being social networking sites and the blogosphere. However the power of the audience can be questioned when referring to the consumption and production of media products and texts due to the varying factors that enable audiences to be passive or non-passive. 

The development of social networking sites and the blogosphere enable audiences to produce beneficial user generated content such as citizen journalism and therefore the audience becomes less passive and more significant, through their production. “The internet is an empowering tool… an exciting and revolutionary prospect,” (Al Gore) which allows audiences to produce information and more importantly share their own ideologies, which not only benefits the individual but the whole audience who similarly share similar views and values. The impact of citizen journalism enhances the authenticity of certain situations, providing evidence and reveals the impact of the audience as a mere bystander. One of the most significant citizen journalism cases was of Rodney King, who was beaten by the LA Police Department; this event was filmed by a bystander on their camcorder revealing the beneficial advantages of new/digital media as a source for providing court evidence as this led to the dismissal of the police officers involved. This historical event has led to the emergence of furthermore citizen journalism stories being posted on social networking sites for example, one of the recent cases being the leak of the footage where a police officer brutally attacked a car when the driver refused to get out; the clip was shared and viewed on Twitter over 40,000 times revealing the rapidity of a video to go viral which highlights a great deal of power for the audience as they are able to view this unedited footage and therefore aids with surveillance, in terms of Blumler and Katz’s Uses and Gratifications theory. However, the validity of the information seen online can also be questionable due to this recent emergence of fake news stories to manipulate audiences and therefore creates moral panics (Stanley Cohen). An example of this is one of 3 British males who posted a picture on Facebook saying they were in Syria and they also sent Snapchats to journalists as ‘proof’ that they were in Syria, this reveals the effects of manipulation and how citizen journalism could just be something that brings about this “15 minutes of fame” and the quality of this offers a negative effect on audiences.  This also reinforces Livingstone/Bober’s 2005 findings of “38% of UK pupils aged 9-19 never question the accuracy of online information.” Therefore, whilst audiences may not be as passive through citizen journalism offering them an opportunity to become powerful, the quality and validity of this journalism is definitely questionable and how accurate it is, which could essentially defeat the purposes of the audience holding the power in terms of production of their own user generated content. It also would negatively affect other audiences through the consumption of this news, providing invalid information and therefore portrays the negative aspects of new/digital media and the potential issues with issues becoming viral so quick. This also has negative effects for journalist jobs and journalism itself through the fact that audiences will not read or watch professional news stories if already encountered by someone on Twitter for example; this therefore threatens journalist jobs and also means the quality of journalism will decrease. The important of receiving accurate news is something that is a necessity to aid an audience to understanding all the facts properly rather than a mere bystander portraying their view on the event. However, citizen journalism could also aid the journalist to heighten their story through the inclusion of these raw video clips to emphasise the grittiness. Therefore although citizen journalism has negative influences through this idea of inaccuracy, it also benefits audiences as well as institutions and is something that has positively impacted upon society, revealing how audience production and consumption has become more powerful over the years.

In addition, this catalyses the idea of censorship and regulation; social networking sites and blogospheres offer platforms for liberation but also for extremist views, revealing ethical concerns in terms of the production of content that an audience is able to produce and what other audiences are able to consume. Although there is a “technological blossoming of the culture of freedom, individual innovation and entrepreneurialism,” (Castells, 1996) moderators are required to filter bigots on websites to heighten the positive experience for audience members online, however the definition of what should or should not be banned is also debatable through the variety of ideologies held by different individuals. Facebook are a prime example of controversial censorship a recent case being where they banned an ‘offensive’ Swedish breast cancer awareness video - Cancerfonden said, “We find it incomprehensible and strange how one can perceive medical information as offensive.” This therefore defeats the purpose of liberation and freedom of speech and also reinforces the debate of what is perceived as ethical or not. This also reveals how the institution holds the dominant role through the ease to simply censor particular content, therefore shows that the audience are simply slaves to the internet. Gatekeepers and moderators essentially hold the power in terms of what can or cannot be produced online but the function of social networking sites and blogospheres makes it simple to surpass these gatekeepers and produce unethical content, such as extremist views; “web pages and blogs are like a million monkeys typing nonsense. (Andrew Keen: ‘The Cult of the Amateur – How Today’s Internet is Killing our Culture’). Twitter has also suspended accounts of 'alt-right' figures who championed Donald Trump's bid for the White House, which counteracts the idea of freedom of speech and makes us question what extremist views should or should not be revealed online as “rebellion is encapsulated in the internet.” (Keen) The individual therefore does not necessarily have the power that they think they have and this therefore supports the Marxist theory through the idea of the audience enjoying the illusion of autonomy, whilst the dominant power lies with the media conglomerate.

Hyper-reality could also be perceived as a potential negative aspect of new/digital media due to the idea of social networking sites embodying postmodern culture therefore audiences are passive through entering the virtual reality created by the institution. The virtual reality allows audiences to be free within their construction of their identity for a bricolage of pop culture reference. Jean Baudrillard’s work is pivotal in understanding terms like hyper- reality and simulacrum, he expresses anxiety about a society alienated from itself. Through hyper-realities an individual creates their idealised persona, causing them to question the real world bringing about this idea of media manipulation and brain washing an audience, linking to the hypodermic needle model. The media is essentially injecting the audience with information to therefore make them allude to the idea that they are in control of their own world whilst they’re creating a utopia that detaches them from the real problems within society. This also links to Stuart Hall and his idea of dominant readings as audiences accept change and accept conformed ideas as they will not question the social norms online, such as the blogosphere or social networking sites. Personal identity is also able to be seen online and therefore personal relationships are able to be built through this hyper-reality relating to Blumler and Katz’s ‘uses and gratifications’ theory. However the idea of click-bait and media manipulation causes us to question what appears online and reveals how the access of illegal content or inappropriate content is easier through this, “57% of 9-19 year olds had come into contact with pornographic material online (Tanya Byron 2008). This idea of a hyper reality also brings about the ideal of moral panics (Stanley Cohen) - if everything is seen as hyper-realistic how are we able to distinguish reality from hyper-reality, therefore would make us question everything we see online within the digital renaissance. Furthermore, the lack of physical communication also makes the audience powerless in the real world, whereby they may hold dominance in their own idealistic world but not in reality, highlighting a negative aspect of the internet as a tool to manipulate audiences into a false utopia.

The decline of newspapers reveals the audience power and how they are essentially able to choose what they consume, therefore causes institutions to adapt according to what the audience wants. Halloran calls “the plural values of society” enabling them to “conform, accommodate, challenge or reject” (Gurevitch et al), therefore audiences are not passive and essentially hold the fate of an institution or in case of newspapers, the print platform itself. According to a 2015 Ofcom report 21% or 16-24 year olds use newspapers to receive news and 61% use social networking sites. This shows the efficiency of new/digital media and how it has impacted audiences to become more reliant on social networking and the internet itself, rather than traditional means of receiving news. Clay Shirky’s lecture portrays a possible explanation for the impact of new/digital media for journalism in particular due to the idea of ‘unbundling content.’ Newspapers are constructed in a particular way in order for the most important news to be seen first and this to be the most important; these two should be hand in hand according to Alain de Botton. However, new/digital media gives audiences the opportunity to choose what to read and therefore the most important news is not necessarily the most important due to the lack of construction online. Shirky believes that the coherence of newspapers is not intellectual but industrial. What goes into print newspapers is content that produces commercial interest to the least interested user. "The aggregation of news has gone from being a server-side to a client-side operation" therefore the content bundled together is made by the consumer rather than the producer. The New York Times is being torn apart now as the online readership falls every year and this is due to users clicking on the stories directly from other sources such as Twitter or Facebook, rather than actually going to the Times' website and searching for the story. So the audience is now being swayed by other members of the audience rather than the newspaper producers, revealing the power of the audience. 

The idea of Pluralism is based around coexisting governments, therefore several ideologies being presented; this would challenge institutions as audiences can essentially choose what we want to consume and are no longer passive in terms of the production of news too. New technology is a great example of a way that we can do this and especially social media as we are able to read certain news articles that resonate with us as consumers, therefore we become users and consumers rather than simply being submissive to the news. The news story of the cryogenically frozen 14 year old girl highlights de Botton's views as it focuses on the element of death and being afraid of death. It also focuses on the fact that we like stories that involve some sort of element of hope or a moral panic rather than simply news that will benefit us; this story is one that emphasises life and death issues and as it is technology that is far from being developed and fully functioning, it shows the potential irrelevance of the story and how it should be kept as a mere private family matter rather than a public news story. Essentially, this story is trying to brag about the new technology being created and how science is evolving but in theory this project is far from being accessible, revealing false hope. Alain de Botton believes that the audience wants to receive news that either contains some sort of moral panic as that’s what we have been conditioned to know. This is reinforced by Galtung and Ruge’s News Values and the set structure by which journalists produce their news according to their audiences as it is what they want to see and will resonate with most. This therefore reveals the fact that producers essentially have to produce content that will sell, meaning the power of the audience has changed in terms of consumption through the factor of being able to choose what to read due to new/digital media and more specifically, social networking sites.

Axiomatically, it becomes difficult to argue whether or not new/digital media has enabled audiences to hold the dominant power or the institution due to the several factors involved within the argument; however the balance that is required in order to create a harmonious society is clear. I think new and digital media allows audiences to challenge views due to the idea of user generated content, however I also believe that above all else, the ruling classes hold the dominant power over societies and audiences. The audience can only have so much say to the point where governments can exert their power and essentially flip this control almost instantly. If a society completely held Marxist ideologies, then it would disrupt the order of a society for example the China communist party led by Xi, has censored and controlled the flow of information online, denying their citizens the opportunity to be exposed to the echo chamber within social networking sites or to share their own individual ideologies, disabling them from any sort of power or control. I think overall the power needs to lie with the institution in order to regulate the flow of what is being produced online, especially though user generated content and therefore the effects of the internet as a medium would be much more positive through thorough regulation and censorship. Although this creates a lot of controversy through the idea of what is questioned as ethical or not, it also enables a more positive experience online.