Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media
Attitudes to digital communication technologies since the 1990s have been characterized by waves of optimism and pessimism, as enthusiasts have highlighted their democratic and liberating potentials, while critics have pointed to the socially, politically and psychologically deleterious consequences...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
De Gruyter
2020-12-01
|
| Series: | Open Cultural Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1515/culture-2020-0014 |
| _version_ | 1818689898262036480 |
|---|---|
| author | Gilbert Jeremy |
| author_facet | Gilbert Jeremy |
| author_sort | Gilbert Jeremy |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Attitudes to digital communication technologies since the 1990s have been characterized by waves of optimism and pessimism, as enthusiasts have highlighted their democratic and liberating potentials, while critics have pointed to the socially, politically and psychologically deleterious consequences of unchecked digital capitalism. This paper seeks to develop an analytical framework capable of appreciating and assessing the capacities of such technologies both to genuinely enhance democratic agency, and to become tools through which capitalist power is enhanced with widespread negative consequences. The paper in particular deploys my concept of ‘potent collectivity’ in order to name the type of democratic agency that such media technologies can be seen both to enable and enhance under certain circumstances, and to inhibit under others. It also considers the affective qualities of ‘potent collectivity’, and in particular the utility of a Deleuzo-Spinozan concept of ‘collective joy’ as designating the affective quality typical of ‘potent collectivity’. The paper uses the specific example of left-wing political activism in the UK during the period 2015-17 to illustrate the potential for platform technologies to enable new forms of democratic mobilization, while arguing for an analytical position that eschews any simple celebration of the liberating potential of new technologies; remaining sensitive to the negative features of ‘platform capitalism’. |
| first_indexed | 2024-12-17T12:17:25Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-ea0a18282c7244e88f32a106c302dc2f |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2451-3474 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-12-17T12:17:25Z |
| publishDate | 2020-12-01 |
| publisher | De Gruyter |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Open Cultural Studies |
| spelling | doaj.art-ea0a18282c7244e88f32a106c302dc2f2022-12-21T21:49:07ZengDe GruyterOpen Cultural Studies2451-34742020-12-014115416810.1515/culture-2020-0014culture-2020-0014Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social MediaGilbert Jeremy0University of East London, London, United KingdomAttitudes to digital communication technologies since the 1990s have been characterized by waves of optimism and pessimism, as enthusiasts have highlighted their democratic and liberating potentials, while critics have pointed to the socially, politically and psychologically deleterious consequences of unchecked digital capitalism. This paper seeks to develop an analytical framework capable of appreciating and assessing the capacities of such technologies both to genuinely enhance democratic agency, and to become tools through which capitalist power is enhanced with widespread negative consequences. The paper in particular deploys my concept of ‘potent collectivity’ in order to name the type of democratic agency that such media technologies can be seen both to enable and enhance under certain circumstances, and to inhibit under others. It also considers the affective qualities of ‘potent collectivity’, and in particular the utility of a Deleuzo-Spinozan concept of ‘collective joy’ as designating the affective quality typical of ‘potent collectivity’. The paper uses the specific example of left-wing political activism in the UK during the period 2015-17 to illustrate the potential for platform technologies to enable new forms of democratic mobilization, while arguing for an analytical position that eschews any simple celebration of the liberating potential of new technologies; remaining sensitive to the negative features of ‘platform capitalism’.https://doi.org/10.1515/culture-2020-0014platform capitalismdemocracysocial mediaaffectcollectivityagencysurveillance capitalismactivism |
| spellingShingle | Gilbert Jeremy Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media Open Cultural Studies platform capitalism democracy social media affect collectivity agency surveillance capitalism activism |
| title | Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media |
| title_full | Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media |
| title_fullStr | Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media |
| title_full_unstemmed | Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media |
| title_short | Platforms and Potency: Democracy and Collective Agency in the Age of Social Media |
| title_sort | platforms and potency democracy and collective agency in the age of social media |
| topic | platform capitalism democracy social media affect collectivity agency surveillance capitalism activism |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1515/culture-2020-0014 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT gilbertjeremy platformsandpotencydemocracyandcollectiveagencyintheageofsocialmedia |