This week’s readings brought a much appreciated injection of political economy, Bourdieu, and criticism of unpaid affective labor into television studies. As Andrejevic rightly observed, “fan activity that—even in the form of a communal activity with all of its attendant benefits—ends up reinforcing social and material relations might be considered a form of active participation in the constitution of those relations rather than a challenge to them. The workplace can be a site of community and personal satisfaction and one of economic exploitation.” (43) I wonder the extent to which fan sites such as TWoP, in addition to being economically exploitative as they are not being compensated as most focus group and sociological survey participants are, but also take time away from other activities such as activism, community organizing, furthering their education, interacting with friends and colleagues in a way that builds social capital? These activities might also bring them a sense of community, the feeling of being heard, the satisfaction of being snarky, etc., but also might improve their material position and hopefully those of their personal network and the surrounding community. I say this not because I am invested in a moral value judgement of online fan participation as an unproductive, thus socially irresponsible pastime. I ask this because it is something I struggle with in my own life, as time spent surfing ranting on Facebook can quickly get out of hand, and I am left with less time for maintaining friendships face-to-face, while I still feel remotely, but unsatisfactorily, connected in general.
I suspect that there is a logic at play here: the lure of interactivity is such that it offers a quick hit of psychological satisfaction for connection and agency, and yet it is only the illusion of both, but because we are busy, and tired, and have internalized the systemic separation and alienation of, in Morse’s words, mobile privatization as a lingering anxiety, we need the instant gratification of technology-mediated interactivity to quickly satisfy our desire. I genuinely don’t see this as immoral, nor do I see it as an unadulterated conquest of our psycho-social needs by the forces of Capital, but it does concern me both in my own life, as well as in its effects that I see as playing out in society around me. Perhaps this is simply my problem, and I fear this response has gotten wildly more personal than I intended, but I do think it is something worth considering in more depth than is possible here.
I'm glad that you noted the tension here — it's honestly one of the things that I like most about Andrejevic's writing in general because it recognizes that both situation exist. To me, I think previous week's readings actually give part of an answer: the desire to be connected to others without having to actually leave the house or share any space. That said, what I find interesting is the ways that sites like TWoP do that across multiple levels that aren't equal: participants who write (and get paid), participants who comment, lurkers, and occasional visitors (along with everything in between). Perhaps there's something to be said about the ways that the unsatisfactory components come when the primary mode of "interaction" with people at a distance is once of lurking rather than active contributing? And maybe a worthwhile part of unpacking the tension in the article is discussing how the tension differs across both individual and collective modes of engagement?
ReplyDelete