Overdue

Now that my brief presentation circuit is over, I can return to active blogging :)  That being said, I have to talk a little about how this class and the readings we've been doing has popped up over the past few weeks; I may have been participating in spirit only, but affect is popping up everywhere.  Granted, this may be because now that I'm working the buzz, I see it in many more places, but I also like to think this may be due to the circuitry system that unites individuals' brains into a loose collective of affected individuals.  In other words, we're all a little bit "touched" (as my Gramma would say) by affect.

Affect has been coming up repeatedly in my Feminist Theory class.  This is probably because several of my colleagues were in the Feminist Research Methods class last semester, but as we tried to discuss several other students expressed an interest in discussing affect.  The summation of the class was that affect seems to fit right in with feminist methodologies and practices.  So here are a few ideas along those lines.  Chandra Talpade Mohanty presents this great outline for feminism without borders and although she’s speaking directly to geography in addition to considering local and global feminisms. Mohanty argues that the first step to leveling the playing field and moving toward this goal is to “read up the ladder of privilege” (452).  Pulling from standpoint theory, she manages to avoid essentialism by acknowledging that knowledge from third world/south women is the most inclusive viewing of systemic power.  This does not mean that the locations or its inhabitants have exclusive and crucial knowledge of inequality, rather the vantage point provides perspectives of the interlocking and systemic oppressions.  I like the idea of opening this up across the body as well.  Feminism as a lived experience enhanced by the connections it creates physically, mentally, and spiritually. 

Making connections is one of the most important aspects of feminist theory and practice – acknowledging connections that exist is one of the major components of affect.  Toss this into the digital era we’re currently swimming in and it seems like we are in the swell of a new era both ripe with potential and threatening disaster.  What I mean is that the digital capabilities of our new media are, as Henry Jenkins argues, a platform for creativity and construction.  A large part of this boils down to deconstructing the past and standardized forms of communication: using the ashes from the old to build up and away into the new.  This could be a way of recycling, but it is also a point in space for new digital creators to use as the antithesis for their work.  The disaster is the ease in which this space can be co-opted for corporate means and the relative acceptance of the capitalistic presence in everyday life.  Additionally, the numbers of those creating versus those passively consuming seem staggeringly disparate.  But the need to connect is more on the surface than ever before.  More of this to come…and with more references to readings from this class coming soon.

Technology, Innovation, and Reasserting the Status Quo: Sponsorship on the Web

*sigh*

I may be beginning all of my posts like this from now on.   Part of the fun/frustration in reading Dan Schiller's Digital Capitalism: Networking the Global Market System is its publication date.  So much has changed and I would love to know Schiller's take on advertising on personal blogs, personalized marketing based on previous clicks, and the scatter shot of local singles with images of scantily clad young ladies that pop up on the edges of downloading websites.  Watching an hour of straight television programming and tracking the kinds of commercials and brands sponsoring the show(s) can provide you with an idea of who the broadcasters and advertisers believe their demographic to be; the distinction is much fuzzier on the Web.  Since 1999, internet advertising has changed considerably.  I kept thinking back to the annoying pop-ups or the banner ads for mortgage rates, weight loss, and teeth whitening or the ads that tell you that you are a winner...seriously...click here or the interactive ads that encourage you to play their ridiculous game.  These methods still occur on a pretty regular basis, regardless of their annoying and universal NON-appeal, but it's the more personalized advertising that comes through websites like Amazon and Endless and the Facebook-flanking ads that I find interesting.

The new web ads are much narrower and personalized, but they also have a higher rate of completely failing.  Yes, these ads are determined by things I have clicked on in the past or feature seemingly related products to previous purchases.  As my new BFF Andrejevic points out, my participation on the internet has created a profile of who I am as a consumer.  When I am on the internet I get lost in rabbit holes of clicks leading me further and further away from anything I, personally, am interested in; I click on things to gawk.  I do research about a wide range of things that do not describe or apply to me personally.  BUT as much as these things leave a mark, they create a better outline of my willingness to look at ridiculous or gross things on the web.  I want to make clear, though, by no means do I disagree with any of Schiller's postulations about the impact of generalizing audience representation and the detrimental effect on recognizing the range of demographics.  If anything, I feel like the move away from reaching anyone beyond the middle has only increased since this book.  

This may be because the semester has blurred into one continuous day, but I can't help but find the technology without content or direction that Raymond Williams covers so well such an important element to our discussion and understanding of the digital shift.  The same can be seen in the film industry with the initial innovation to perfect the cameras (in order to boost phonograph sales, go figure) and the overlap of trying to better synchronize sound to screen; sometimes the push for capital ends up yielding an accidental art form.  And while I love the productive happenstance, to me this means the framework is already established for these art forms to reproduce the ideology and social norms.  Even in works that push against the norm, it seems like they are so easy to co-opt for increasingly neo-liberal conditions and transnational corporations.  The pressure sponsors like Chrysler feel that they can put on the content of their ad vehicles is completely infuriating.  I hate this customer is always right attitude that has infiltrated all levels of our society making everyone who gets challenged in the slightest outraged at the lack of deference.  It's disgusting and it's making us more provincial, less educated, and better minions for the capitalist machine.  

And in temporary conclusion *sigh*