The change from Mass-society to the Network Society –New Conceptual Model: Digitalization

New conceptual model?

In “The Resistance Studies Reader 2008” Karl Palmås lay out a text which says that conceptual models that support our worldview often are intertwined with technology. Palmås mention for example that concepts such as “hacking”, “open source”, “protocols”, and “peer-to-peer” circulate in settings that do not bear relation to their origin and argues that this is an indication that our world-view are being shaped into an emerging computer-inspired worldview and quote DeLanda on Serres:

“Serres was the frst to point out that the transition between the clockwork age and the motor age had more profound implications than the simple addition of a new brand of machines to the technological ‘races’ already in existence. He sees in the emergence of the steam motor a complete break with the conceptual models of the past. […]

When the abstract mechanism [of a motor, such as the so-called ‘Carnot cycle’ of the heat engine] had been dissociated from its physical contraption [the actual motor] it entered the lineages of other technologies, including the ‘conceptual technology’ of science3.

Thus, Serres argues that as new types of machines enter the social world, they may end up changing our ways of seeing the world. The logic of the motor did not only appear in the contraptions studied by engineers and natural scientists: it also shaped the theories of modern social scientists, philosophers and artists. In their introduction to the English edition of Serres’ book Hermes, Josué Harari and David Bell state that Serres charted how the motor emerged as “the universal model of knowledge in the nineteenth century, a construct that always functions in the same way in all cultural domains – from Marx to Freud, from Nietzsche to Bergson, or from Zola to Turner.”

I mentioned in my first blog post on the Network Society that the scale on social organisation in the mass-society lead the way to the modern welfare state, military-industrial complex(es), and social engineering, among other things. The steam machine and other industrial technologies influenced economy, city planning, culture etc, with the result that we added an industrialization mindset, which among other things premiered large scale, rationality, division of labour, on multiple (and extended application)societal areas . Perhaps the most scarring aspect of this development was the German National Socialists who even tried genocide under its principles.

If we are, which I believe, in a transitional phase between mass-society and network society it logically means that we are also in a transitional phase between two conceptual models. If we argue that the logic of the motor changed the conceptual model of science, which in turn spilled over to other areas, resulting in a new mindset/conceptual model, which created the 19^th century version of mass-society, we need to ask what conceptual model that will shape the network society?

Some examples are found in Palmås article: “hacking”, “open source”, “protocols”, and “peer-to-peer” –all fine suggestions for a contemporary conceptual model. But I think that the driving technology will not be computer-centric from a hacker, or activist perspective, but more of a basic and more of a foundational perspective. What could be more foundational for a society with an increasingly higher degree of mediated communication and network-based social components then digitalization?

What is digitalization?

According to Wikipedia the definition of digitalization is “Digitizing or digitization is the representation of an object, image, sound, document or a signal (usually an analog signal) by a discrete set of its points or samples. The result is called digital representation or, more specifically, a digital image, for the object, and digital form, for the signal”. To put it in more layman’s term: “conversion of analog information into digital information” (taken from wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn). Henry Jenkins’s adds the aspect that digitalized information can “move fluidly across media platforms and be easily reconfigured in different contexts”.

Even though the mere technological aspects of digitalization are both interesting and important, the effects of this technology are even more interesting. If digitalization becomes our new conceptual model we can start to talk about a digital culture.

After Digitalization – Digital Culture?

The thought of digitizing, or digitalization is not new. Nor is the distinct digital culture something contemporary. Charlie Gere has written perhaps the most intriguing and complex works on the culture of digitalization. In his book “Digital Culture”, Gere lay out the ideological origins of computers, the history of computers, and the history of digital  technologies. The book is fascinating and its most interesting idea is that digitalization has its root in the 18^th century enlightenment. This would argue that the technology was formed as a conceptual model from scratch. Gere also points out that the digital culture doesn’t refer to technology but refer to a different way of thinking:

“Digital refers not just to the effects and possibilities of a particular technology. It defines and encompasses the ways of thinking and doing that are embedded within that technology.”

Jan van Dijk portrays digitalization as just one out of many technological innovations that lay the foundation for the Network Society, with two other significant innovations being microchip technology and convergence. Van Dijk also underlines that when an object becomes digital (translated into separate bytes) it can “be produced and consumed in separate pieces and combined in every manner imaginable”. In more abstract terms, the effects are groundbreaking:

“From now on, every item can be presented on screens and accompanied by sound. All items can be stored on digital data carriers and retrieved from them in virtually unlimited amounts and at virtually unlimited speed. In the preceding sentences, digital technology and cultural impact has already been linked. Thus, at this point in the discussion, the reader can gather that digitalization increases the chances of:

• a standardization and differentiation of culture;
• a fragmentation of culture;
• a collage of culture;
• an acceleration of culture;
• a visualization of culture;
• a larger quantity of culture.”

Both Gere and van Dijk argue that we so far don’t fully grasp the effects of digitalization which probably are correct. Just remember that when we talk about digitalization, we talk about the conversation from analogue to digital information, which refer to every fact about the world, which means that in a digital world all knowledge, at least all migratory knowledge (everything existing of coded signs in books, databases etc) will be digital. Perhaps more interesting is how tacit knowledge (accumulated expertise with in individuals or groups, such as craftsmanship or individual skills) will be influenced by the digitalization of the migratory knowledge. This however, will surely be a question of the (near)future.

The next two post will go into depth with content, social interactions and business aspects of the shift from mass society to network society.

The quotes in this post are derived from “Network Society – Social Aspects of New Media, Second Edition” by Jan A.G.M. Van Dijk, published by Sage Publications, “Digital Culture, Expanded Second Edition” by Charlie Gere, published by Reaktion Books LTD, and The “Resistance Studies Reader 2008”, edited by Christopher Kullenberg and Jakob Lehne, published by Resistance Studies Network, http://resistancestudies.org/.

Advertisement

~ by scarlstrom on May 4, 2010.